MR LOWRY vehemently denied mentioning Mr Dunne in his conversation with
Fine Gael TD Mr Paul McGrath about the proposed Dunnes-linked shopping complex in Mullingar. No one from Dunnes Stores had ever asked him to intervene in relation to the opposition of Fine Gael councillors to the project or any other matter, said Mr Lowry.
The former minister also rejected suggestions by Mr Kevin Feeney SC, for Fine Gael, that it was imperative at the time of his discussion with his fellow TD that he protect his business arrangements with Dunnes Stores following the family dispute.
Mr Feeney described as "ridiculous" claims by Mr Lowry's counsel that Mr McGrath's evidence to the tribunal had been motivated by an attempt to gain pre-election publicity.
However, Mr Lowry commented that the only logic to such a statement and the timing of it was that there was "some political consideration involved."
Responding to questions about the proposed Dunnes-linked shopping development at Harbour Place in Mullingar, Mr Lowry recalled that he received a telephone call from the developer, Mr Derry McPhillips.
The developer had contacted Mr Lowry, then the party chairman, on the suggestion of a Fine Gael TD, Mr Phil Hogan.
Mr McPhillips protested at the opposition of Fine Gael councillors in Westmeath to his proposed development. No mention of
Dunnes was made.
Mr Lowry said he made no representations about it. He was interested in issues in his own constituency and not those in Westmeath.
Responding to questions by Mr Feeney, he confirmed that a brief conversation took place between himself and Mr McGrath concerning the Mullingar development in April 1994, after he was contacted by the developer.
Mr Feeney said that Mr Lowry clearly knew enough about the situation to tell Mr McGrath that it appeared to be "a good commercial development."
Mr Lowry said he simply asked what was wrong with this proposed development, and described Mr McPhillips as someone who appeared to have a grievance against Fine Gael in this area.
Mr McGrath had explained to him the reason for his opposition to the Dunnes-linked development was that he wanted to protect family-owned businesses in the area, and Mr Lowry accepted that.
"I didn't in any way put pressure on him or use words such as "Wind down your opposition to it". It just didn't happen," he told the tribunal.
In his evidence to the tribunal Mr McGrath had said that Mr Lowry had mentioned the financial contribution mentioned by Mr Dunne.
However, Mr Lowry said he never spoke publicly about contributions given in confidence. It was, in fact, Mr McGrath who had brought Mr Dunne's name into the conversation.
Mr Feeney said Mr Lowry must have been acutely aware at this time of the ongoing family dispute within Dunnes Stores. As he had been closely associated with Mr Ben Dunne, it was possible the new management might not continue the same relationship with him.
Streamline Enterprises' financial records showed receipts from Dunnes Stores in excess of Pounds 340,000 in March 1994, and more than Pounds 346,000 the following month.
"The point I'm making is that in April 1994 there would have been an imperative on you to try and ensure that you could demonstrate to Dunnes Stores that you were a person of influence and effect to them," said Mr Feeney.
Mr Lowry answered: "Absolutely not. What I am saying to you quite clearly is that in the course of this discussion no such comment was made by me and the matter of Dunnes Stores and Ben Dunne's involvement never arose.
Earlier, in response to Mr Denis McCullough SC, for the tribunal, Mr Lowry said it was "beyond comprehension" how Mr McGrath had put the construction he had on events.
When Mr Lowry had raised the issue Mr McGrath "immediately reacted and said to me, "You're acting for Ben Dunne" and I said, "I'm not." He said Mr McGrath didn't believe, and still didn't believe, that he wasn't acting for Ben Dunne, that he was delivering a protest on behalf of Mr McPhillips.
Mr Lowry said Mr McGrath had not told him to "eff off". It simply didn't happen.
Mr Dunne had never made an improper approach to him, Mr Lowry said. If he was put in that position he would make the appropriate call and refuse it. No representative of Dunnes had ever made such an approach to him.
Mr McCullough said there was no suggestion that any representations of any sort were made to Mr Lowry.
Mr Lowry denied that his arrangements with Dunnes meant he was compromised if asked for a political favour by Mr Dunne. His arrangement was a legitimate business one.
Dunnes Stores "got even better value than they are used to giving themselves" from the arrangement.
The tribunal adjourned until 10.30 a.m. next Monday.