A bad week for the Government and a terrible week for Bertie Ahern. One referendum down and one stadium up in the air, reads the end-of-week audit. Bertie's conciliatory personality and understated parliamentary manner are carefully cultivated and usually serve him well. He rarely betrays anger save on such rare occasions as when he told Gay Mitchell that he was "only a waffler". This week the Taoiseach, irritated beyond concealment at the setback to his pet project at Abbotstown, reached across the Chamber to invoke the assistance of the same Gay Mitchell who once dreamt of bringing the Olympics to Dublin. Oh! You're not involving me in this, was Mitchell's response, to the amusement of the House.
Worse was to come. The Taoiseach, who is usually well briefed, seemed to be completely taken aback by the Opposition's refusal to nod through a referendum on judicial misconduct. Yet his Minister for Justice could not have misunderstood the consistent opposition of Fine Gael and Labour.
The outcome is a debacle for the Government. The cornerstone of our democracy is the separation of powers and to blunder into a constitutional amendment without preparing the ground is a major embarrassment. The last quarter from which the Government needed assistance was former Supreme Court judge Hugh O'Flaherty. His typically flowery hyperbole in The Dubliner magazine resembles nothing so much as the stock-in-trade of his neighbour, John O'Donoghue.
Apparently, according to citizen O'Flaherty, the Labour stance on the Amendment could be compared to the infamous Star Chamber of King Charles I, Stalin's show trials and the corrupt regime of Marcos in the Philippines. It must be something in the water in Caherciveen.
It is difficult to locate anything in the contributions of the Labour Party spokesperson on justice, Brendan Howlin, that isn't directly counter to the former eminent judge's charge that Labour wants judges to answer to political masters. As the law stands, 50 per cent plus one of the members of the Oireachtas may impeach a judge and the existing constitutional protection is confined to superior court judges. In any event this is scarcely an issue on which the Government parties want to attract attention. The Taoiseach's plea for consensus was a death-bed conversion and certainly not one signalled by his rampaging Minister for Justice.
The political humiliation of having to reverse engines in the Dail on a referendum planned for June 7th was somewhat alleviated for the Government by the timely breaking of another Michael Lowry story. Whether it has a shelf life as a news story depends somewhat on whether Lowry advised the Moriarty Tribunal and if it is true that, as reported, this was a loan paid back within weeks.
All the background noises lead Drapier to believe Bertie is engaged in a clearing of the decks. The Taoiseach is hugely resentful of what he considers uninformed criticism of the Bertiebowl and of the newly rediscovered interest of the PDs in prudent public spending. Bobby Molloy revealed in the Dail that Ministers have been asked "to scale back spending plans in a number of areas" and went on to describe the Bertiebowl as "one of the biggest capital projects ever contemplated in the history of this State." He said the PDs "want to know exactly what the Government is being asked to sign up for." On the face of it this is an extraordinary statement by one of the parties in Government at this late stage of the project.
Lashing out at critics because Bertie never saw them at a match hardly constitutes a robust defence of the adventure at Abbotstown. Lovebombing other commentators to believe that our Taoiseach spends his Sundays in Croke Park and therefore knows what he's talking about misses the point that Croke Park has been closed since the Australian Rules encounter last autumn. If Croke Park can attract only 22,000 fans for a National League final, from where will the Bertiebowl attract capacity attendances? Andorra?
Nor is it apparent there is much relief for the Government parties in what Maurice Manning describes as the ongoing dripfeed of history as we revisit the Arms Trial. Relations between the two parties have been soured by the Croke Park "stroke" and Des O'Malley ending up in the dock of public opinion has only strained them further. The remarkable television clash between James Kelly and Garret FitzGerald did more for O'Malley partisans than did his own unconvincing performance on Sunday night. Gerry Gregg must be regretting he didn't invite Olivia O'Leary to do the questioning of O'Malley.
Drapier's suggestion of some weeks ago for an assessment of the literature, including the Public Accounts Committee archive, still stands. Meanwhile Liam Cosgrave is hale and hearty and apparently not minded to intervene.
Predictably the Abbeylara committee ended up agreeing to the adjournment sought by counsel for certain gardai. For how long will it get under way before its position is judicially reviewed is the unspoken question in here. If that were to happen, is there any reason not to expect that a similar fate awaits the CIE inquiry? If so, what are the implications for the future of inquiry by parliamentary committee? Some colleagues are beginning to regard the DIRT inquiry as the one swallow that doesn't make a summer.
Is the only alternative investigation by tribunal of inquiry? The Public Accounts Committee was speedy, efficient and relatively inexpensive. Apart entirely from such considerations, there is the matter of public accountability and the role of Parliament.
There is no indication that the questions raised are exercising the Government.