For the second week in a row Bertie Ahern delivered a lengthy, carefully worded script concerning his behaviour in relation to Ray Burke. It mixed justification with considerable dollops of explanation, clarification, admission of possible past misjudgments and expressions of regret.
This week's offering, delivered on Wednesday as the Dail agreed to refer payments to Mr Burke to the Flood tribunal, contained further modification in tone and content. After Mr Burke resigned last September, Mr Ahern angrily condemned what he said was the victimisation and hounding of a good man. There's none of that now.
Last week Mr Ahern gave the Dail the impression that he and his party had given helpful, unsolicited information to the Flood tribunal. This was revised on Wednesday after it emerged that, despite knowing about the June 1989 payment of £30,000 to Mr Burke by the Fitzwilton subsidiary Rennicks since early April, the party had not told the tribunal. Instead it had informed the tribunal only of what it was legally required to inform it: the payment by Mr Burke of £10,000 from this amount.
Mr Ahern cited unspecified "legal advice", confusion over the amounts, and the lack of independent verification as the reasons for this omission. However, he conceded Fianna Fail had been clearly told by Rennicks that £30,000 had been paid. He "certainly should have" told the Progressive Democrats of this information. "Perhaps" he should have informed the Dail when he discovered he had inadvertently misled it last September.
Back then he supported Mr Burke's assertion that the £10,000 he gave to Fianna Fail headquarters came from money donated by Joseph Murphy Structural Engineering (JMSE). In early April he discovered that it did not. "If my statement is to be construed as inadvertently misleading the House, then I certainly regret that," he told the Dail ambiguously on Wednesday.
There was an acknowledgement too of political misjudgment at the time of Mr Burke's appointment as minister for foreign affairs. "The benefit of hindsight" showed he seriously underestimated the trouble the allegations against Mr Burke would cause when he appointed him.
Having defended Mr Burke robustly last September, Mr Ahern this week went as far as to admit he was "surprised and disappointed" at the picture now emerging. He believed Mr Burke should have given a "full and frank explanation" to the country, and this "should not have to be extracted" by a tribunal.
While there was much retraction and climbing down by Mr Ahern, he was able to reject the claim by the Labour Party leader, Mr Ruairi Quinn, that he had been told last September by Mr Dick Spring of the details of an anonymous note linking Rennicks to a £30,000 payment to Mr Burke. Fianna Fail let it be known this week that Mr Ahern had spoken to Mr Spring about this last Tuesday, and Mr Spring had assured him he had never mentioned Rennicks, but merely said he had received an anonymous note making allegations about Mr Burke.
For more revelations we may have to wait for the Flood tribunal to get its teeth into the payments to Mr Burke. Some reports suggest the tribunal has already identified payments of over £400,000 to Mr Burke over a 20-year period that could be investigated.
The Dail agreed on Wednesday that there will be yet another Tribunal Bill, this time to allow Mr Justice Flood's planning tribunal to investigate payments to Mr Burke. This comes hot on the heels of the Tribunal Act passed earlier this year, which the Government said was necessary to accede to Mr Justice Flood's request to have his terms of reference altered. That legislation allowed the Oireachtas to change the terms of reference of a tribunal if the tribunal asked for such a change.
Now the Government is to introduce, as a matter of urgency, legislation further amending the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Acts so as to enable the Oireachtas to resolve to change the terms of reference of a tribunal, subject to the consent of the sole member of the tribunal.
Once this legislation is enacted, the Government will seek Mr Justice Flood's consent to "the amendment of the terms of reference of the tribunal to establish whether payments were made to Ray Burke in circumstances giving rise to a reasonable inference that the motive for making the payment was connected with any ministerial office held by him or had the potential to influence the discharge of such office".
As for the motive for making the £30,000 payment to Mr Burke, Fitzwilton, the parent company of Rennicks, has insisted it was done to support the democratic process. On Thursday the Tanaiste, Ms Harney, said inquiries made in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the State's industrial development agencies had found no evidence of any political interference in relation to grant applications by Rennicks.
In 1988, £240,000 in grant aid was approved for the company, while £180,000 was actually paid. In 1989 there were talks between Rennicks and the IDA concerning a joint venture with a Japanese company. In October 1989 the IDA approved £4.2 million aid for the project in Kilcoole, Co Wicklow. But because of planning objections it did not go ahead.
There is still disagreement as to exactly how Fianna Fail was informed of the £30,000 payment. Last week Mr Ahern told the Dail that "a Mr David Byrne, on behalf of the company, made contact to say that they had given no money at all, under any circumstances, and that this was not correct. Some time later Mr Rennicks confirmed that it was the case."
Mr Byrne subsequently denied this version of events, saying he had initially denied to Fianna Fail's fund-raiser, Mr Des Richardson, on the phone that £10,000 had been given, but that subsequently and during the same telephone conversation he had said the figure was £30,000. He sought an apology from Mr Ahern.
Mr Ahern's apology on Wednesday was limited. He said Mr Richardson would give a different version as sworn evidence to a tribunal. This stated that the first reaction of a Rennicks representative "was to deny that any money had been given by Rennicks and threaten Fianna Fail with an injunction if the affidavit were proceeded with".
However "after his initial contact with Mr David Byrne, who was acting on behalf of Robin Rennicks, in the next conversation a day later, Mr Richardson was given a different version, this time involving a £30,000 contribution, but not routed through Ray Burke". Mr Ahern therefore conceded he had been mistaken "in one particular aspect" in that it was Mr Byrne, and not Mr Rennicks, who had corrected the original information. He apologised to Mr Byrne "for any distress caused in that regard".
The detail may not be unimportant. Mr Byrne's version suggests that Fianna Fail was told on first contact of the contribution. The importance to Mr Byrne and Rennicks of their version being accepted may be to dispel any suggestion that they were reluctant to disclose the information, as this could be misinterpreted as suggesting they saw it as something to hide.