Analysis:Ahern's new evidence cannot be checked against bank records, writes Colm Keena.
After three full days of evidence from Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, his account of what lies behind four substantial cash lodgements made in 1994 and 1995 is less clear than ever.
Tribunal counsel Des O'Neill SC returned yesterday to the issue of what Ahern told the tribunal during 2½ years of contact that culminated in a private interview with the Taoiseach in April of this year.
He outlined the contacts between the tribunal and Ahern and how bank accounts that should have been disclosed to the tribunal were not disclosed to the tribunal, and how transactions that should have been disclosed to the tribunal were not disclosed to the tribunal.
The chairman of the tribunal, Judge Alan Mahon, described some of the information left out of responses received by way of correspondence from Ahern, as "vital information", the absence of which left a "hole" in the money trail the tribunal was seeking to follow.
It was not until earlier this year that Ahern disclosed to the tribunal, in a letter from his solicitors, that Manchester-based Michael Wall had given £28,772.90 to Ahern's then partner Celia Larkin.
It is now known that this money was handed over in sterling cash, and was handed to Ahern, who in turn says he handed it to Larkin.
It was after the receipt of this letter, and because it had failed to establish the source of the money lodged to Ahern's accounts from its inquiries up to that point, that the tribunal decided to invite him in for private interview.
The tribunal is inquiring into Ahern's accounts because of an allegation that he received money (£50,000 and £30,000, in 1989 and 1992 respectively) from developer Owen O'Callaghan, something which both Ahern and O'Callaghan deny.
Ahern has said he has co-operated with the tribunal so as to show that no funds entered his accounts from O'Callaghan, and no evidence of any such payment has been found.
It seems, however, that the tribunal is not satisfied that it can as yet rule out the four lodgements that form the focus of the current inquiry, and hence the current sittings.
In other words, Ahern is being called to give evidence in public because his explanations to date are unsatisfactory. It is hard to see how yesterday's performance can have changed the tribunal's view.
Much of Ahern's story involves arrangements he entered into with Wall, in late 1994.
Wall was going to buy a house in Drumcondra which Ahern would rent and which Wall could stay in during visits to Dublin. Wall has said he gave approximately £30,000 sterling in cash to Ahern on December 3rd, 1994, which Larkin was to administer. The money was to be spent on the renovation of the house, and the payment of stamp duty.
Larkin put the money in an account opened in her name in AIB O'Connell St. The lodgement came to £28,772.90. The bank's records do not support the statement that the lodgement was the product of £30,000 sterling.
On the same day, Monday, December 5th, 1994, Larkin opened a second account in her name, into which was transferred £50,000 belonging to Ahern. This money was also to be spent on the house.
However, the £50,000 was withdrawn, in cash, six weeks later.
Ahern says he used some of the money to buy £30,000 sterling, and kept all the money in his safe in St Luke's.
In June 1995, Larkin lodged £10,000 sterling in cash to AIB O'Connell Street, to an account in her name, for use on the house. In December 1995, Ahern lodged £20,000 sterling in cash to one of his accounts in the bank.
When, in April, Ahern was asked about these latter two lodgements, he for the first time told the tribunal about buying £30,000 sterling in cash with some of the £50,000 withdrawn in January 1995.
He said he intended returning Wall's £30,000 sterling to him, but then changed his mind and didn't, and relodged the money later in two lodgements.
It was, he said, the same money being withdrawn and then being relodged.
The tribunal then inquired into this and examined the bank's records. There was no record of any sale of £30,000 sterling during the period concerned. The average sale was approximately £2,000 and the largest less than £10,000.
Yesterday Ahern changed his evidence in relation to the purchase of £30,000 sterling.
In agreeing with Judge Mahon that he could not and had not forgotten such a "unique event", he added: "whether I did that myself or asked somebody to do that for me".
When Judge Gerald Keys said that Ahern would have had to notify the bank in advance before making such a large foreign exchange purchase, Ahern agreed and then said: "whether it was done in instalments or whether I did it through the bank at all".
He said he had looked for the transaction in some of the institutions he uses, as well as banks that are "beside me".
He said he was very busy at the time and it was "very likely" he would have had someone else buy the sterling for him.
Given the vagueness of this new version of what occurred, there would seem to be little the tribunal can do to test its accuracy by reference to bank records.
Two further points can be made concerning the £30,000 sterling.
Larkin, in the two accounts she opened in December 1994, was holding money in trust for Wall and Ahern.
However, when Ahern was considering returning money to Wall, he exchanged his own money.
The money Larkin was holding for Ahern was left in its account.
Also, neither Wall nor Ahern can say exactly how much sterling Wall handed over on December 3rd, 1994, and the amount lodged on the following Monday by Larkin does not equate to £30,000 sterling. However, the sterling cash lodged by Ahern in June and December 1995 was exactly £30,000 sterling.