As the Abbeylara Inquiry got under way, John Rogers SC did not reserve his disdain for the very notion of such inquiry by parliamentary committee. Mr Rogers, representing the Garda representative organisations, apparently doesn't believe that findings of fact are appropriate to a parliamentary committee - only to a tribunal of inquiry, he said. The disability that gives rise to this conclusion, the former Attorney General thundered, is that the members of the sub-committee are "politically composed".

And where did the "politically composed" members of the subcommittee decide to embark on this hazardous adventure? "In a room." This telling conclusion rang around the committee chamber with all the disbelief of Lady Bracknell's incredulous: "In a handbag?" The apparent proposition that making decisions in a room is peculiar to politicians seemed to bemuse the elected members.

There was some irony in Mr Rogers's extensive and unattributed reliance on the final DIRT Report to make his case that such an inquiry as Abbeylara is inappropriate to a parliamentary committee. The DIRT Report traces the origins of the parliamentary Inquiry to the Parnell Commission which in 1889 vindicated Parnell and exposed the Pigott letters to be fake.

It is clear that the DIRT Committee drew heavily on the absorbing submission by the current Attorney General, Michael McDowell SC, on the merits of the parliamentary inquiry as compared to the tribunal of inquiry. McDowell certainly did not conclude that a parliamentary inquiry was inappropriate to make findings of fact nor did he conclude that a parliamentary inquiry would always be suitable or, depending on the issue, to be preferred over a tribunal of inquiry.

It is an issue to which a new Dail is likely to turn whenever the current tribunals complete their work. In the interim, Sean Ardagh, Brendan Howlin, Alan Shatter and their colleagues have a very onerous duty to discharge.

No doubt of greater public interest was John Rogers's assertion that the Garda Siochana are accountable only to "God and the courts of law". This may be no more than a factual statement of the traditional position. However, we live in a democracy, and the proposition that elected representatives of the people cannot call the gardai to account, at a minimum in a policy sense, will cause disquiet to a lot of thinking citizens.

ALSO causing disquiet are the ongoing Arms Trials revelations, although the rush to judgment in certain quarters seems premature. The imminent TV programme series on Des O'Malley's life and times is eagerly awaited. Some Fianna Fail colleagues can scarcely conceal their glee at Dessie's discomfort. They should delay judgment.

Surely Drapier is not the only one wearying of Noel Davern's repeated expressions of outrage concerning the illegal movement of animals, as if the phenomenon was only discovered following the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in the UK?

Anyone following the machinations of the meat industry ever since EU membership will not be in the least surprised that untagged animals are mysteriously straying on the roads of Tipperary. A blind eye has been turned for years to certain practices in the meat industry and, with a brief interruption, ever since 1987 the man at the top (or close to the top) of agriculture has been none other than Davern's senior minister, Joe Walsh. If foot-and-mouth is effective in doing what the beef tribunal and several politicians have failed to do, then it won't be all downside. In the interim, please spare us the rising indignation.

Mary Harney's indignation concerning the Bertie Bowl is only marginally less puzzling. Surely the Tanaiste must have given the nod to this monument to our best known sports fan? Perhaps she will say that she didn't know then that the costs of the project would climb towards £1 billion. Ironically, it was the manner and timing of Bertie Ahern's communication to Croke Park that has brought the Abbots town proposal into sharper focus.

SO FAR it must be said that it is not standing up very well to scrutiny. It would be the final irony if the man who has managed to duck the weave and avoid the more obvious punches was to come to grief on a vanity project connected to sport. Michael Noonan has signalled that Fine Gael will run with the issue in next week's private members' time, and Ruairi Quinn has called for no contracts to be signed in advance of the general election. The four independents can be relied on to support the Government as long as Noel Dempsey is prepared to sabotage his own Local Government Reform Bill. However, if the Fine Gael motion proceeds it will call the PDs' bluff. Mary Harney appears to have already begun the climbdown.

The Dail proper resumes next week for what may prove to be a defining term. It does so against the background of a rule change that has altered forever the time-honoured order-of-business routine. Effectively this first critical joust of the parliamentary day is now the exclusive and orderly preserve of the main party leaders. This change, sponsored by the Ceann Comhairle, was initiated during the defenestration of John Bruton and was vehemently opposed by Labour.

To some surprise Noonan did not seek to overturn the change, and opinion is divided as to the outcome. It has certainly produced a more orderly Dail and a less taxing one for Seamus Pattison. All three leaders have done well under the new system, with Bertie managing to anticipate the issues but taking something of a pasting on issues like the Jamie Sinnott case and Croke Park.

The jury is still out. Is a well ordered Dail and a quiet life the end objective? All governments would hope so.