Much of the political action was elsewhere this week. Leinster House was busy enough, with many committees in session - not that you'd know from media coverage - but the headline stuff was in Dublin Castle and Strasbourg.
It's hard to know what to make of Mr Justice Flood's tribunal. It did not start well, and already there are some in here wondering if it will be another expensive exercise which in the end will tell us little.
Drapier's current view inclines that way. It may turn out so because there is little to tell. It may just be that builders and developers behaved as builders and developers often do; some small number of politicians and officials behaved badly; the whole thing was limited to a small number of players; and others may have been indifferent or chose to look the other way. But one way or other, without documentary proof, it's one man's word against another's, and it could be difficult to prove anything conclusively.
A second view in here is that the tribunal process itself is irretrievably flawed, and stalemate, delay and paralysis will be its enduring characteristics.
We saw plenty of evidence to support this view on Wednesday. Thirty or 40 expensive, geared-up and highly qualified lawyers were let loose in a situation where the law itself is complex and often unclear and where one right cancels another. The possibility of a constitutional challenge is a constant threat.
We have to keep reminding ourselves that the tribunal was set up to establish certain facts and to report back to us in the Oireachtas. Drapier has no doubt that such is Mr Justice Flood's intent. But on this week's evidence he is going to have to cut through a jungle of extraneous growth to get anywhere near the central facts.
But it should not be forgotten that it is Mr Justice Flood, and he alone, who will make the final report. No jury, no bench of colleagues, just one man. From what Drapier hears Mr Justice Flood is tough, so close to retirement that no further preferment is possible, utterly independent and the last man to be intimidated by some of the tactics of this past week.
We will see. But Drapier was much taken by the thoughtful observations of James Nugent SC on Tuesday's Prime Time when he questioned the appropriateness of such an elaborate and expensive procedure and suggested something closer to an inspector, as under the Companies Act, at least in the early stages.
As things stand, and unless there is a marked change for the better, the present process has little to recommend it.
Indeed, the conspiracy theorists are already spinning webs. Some hint darkly that it was all a plot from the beginning. The tribunal was never meant to work. This was the Government's intent all along, and this is what is now happening.
The second theory - and there are more than two - is that the leaks are orchestrated by one or other vested interest; and the constant spate of "leaks" and challenges is designed to frustrate the tribunal before it even starts. Drapier believes there may be firmer ground under this theory; but a bit of supporting evidence would help.
Drapier has a concluding remark on this issue, and it concerns one of his basic rules of politics, and one we would be fools to ignore. It is that tribunals, once started, very quickly take on a life of their own, a life few can predict, and once started, not easily controlled. But the problem with this particular tribunal is actually getting it started.
The other source of parliamentary action this week was Strasbourg. Drapier was delighted to see his European parliamentary colleagues flexing their muscles, even if the knock-out punch was judged an act too far . . . for the moment at any rate.
Drapier is reluctant to write about our MEPs. They can be such a sensitive lot that to mention one invites the wrath of others who feel they have been slighted. But Drapier has said before and repeats: most of our MEPs work hard, take their jobs seriously and are reasonably sane.
The problem is the public doesn't see it that way. But then, the public doesn't see it that way about us either. The problem for the MEPs is that most of their work impinges on interest groups rather than the general public. Most of their contact is with such groups and is unknown to the wider public.
And in the nature of things, most aspects of the European Parliament are remote and appear to have little real day-to-day relevance, even after 20 years of direct elections.
Some of our MEPs are very good communicators, and all have adequate budgets to help get across their message. Incidentally, outgoing MEPs will go into their re-election campaigns armed with resources from public funds which would certainly raise the eyebrows of the Ethics Commissioners who now oversee Dail and Seanad elections.
But that's another day's work. Drapier's point this week is that the MEPs have struck a blow for parliamentary accountability. They have struck a chord with many who believe that there is a great deal of "looseness", to say the least, about the way European finances are handled, and that the whole outfit could do with a bit more of the Scandinavian public ethic, and less of the more relaxed Mediterranean one.
Finally this week, the North. It's depressing and getting worse. Drapier had always felt that if the structures were put in place, if the centre parties, the SDLP and Unionists, were put in the driving seat, then sufficient momentum could be generated to get us over the next hurdles and get the show on the road.
The breakdown in relations between Seamus Mallon and David Trimble, if true, is the worst possible news at the worst possible time. John Taylor's sniping at Mallon's bona fides was characteristically mischievous, but unless Trimble and Mallon can rise above their current difficulties, the process is in deep trouble. For that reason, if for no other, Drapier expects them to do so. Yesterday's signs are encouraging and ensure normal service is resumed.
The other worrying aspect is the hardening of attitudes at the extremes. Drumcree will not go away and has the potential to turn into something very nasty. The IRA's deliberately provocative calendar and its menacing New Year message display a mindset little interested in lasting peace.