£50,000 allegation against Padraig Flynn defies logic

Imagine this. You're a person who spends a fair amount of time in the public eye

Imagine this. You're a person who spends a fair amount of time in the public eye. Your name would be known by most of the population. One day you get a phone call from a journalist. The scribe in question explains that there are some details of a story they are writing that need checking.

Then they ask you the question. "When did you stop beating your wife?" Your response is, of course, that you never beat your wife. The headline the next day is "(Your name here) denies ever beating his wife".

What they've printed is true, but that doesn't mean you would be that happy it has been emblazoned on the front page of a national newspaper. After all, there's no smoke without fire, right?

A week ago I wrote that the business of any tribunal should be carried out by that tribunal and not in the press. I believe that. But in Padraig Flynn's case his business has already left the tribunal chamber and found its way into the media.

READ MORE

He has found himself in a variation of the situation I've described above. Which is why I am writing this, that and the fact that a large number of questions haven't been asked yet but should be. Questions that might cause you to question the smoke-fire link.

When confronted with the £50,000 allegation Padraig had three options. A measured denial. An enraged swipe at the rumourmongers. Or saying nothing.

Pee opted for a measured denial. In political circles this has been adjudged to be a mistake. Not so, because pursuing the other options would have left him worse off.

The "no comment" response is no longer considered to mean just that. It is now taken by many as a tacit admission of guilt or at least an indicator that you have something to hide. On the other hand, the enraged swipe is what many might have expected. After all, it would be how most Fianna Failers would have reacted to an attack from the media. But losing one's temper would have been inappropriate behaviour for a European Commissioner and would have made his response no more credible.

An examination of Padraig Flynn's work as a European Commissioner is also relevant. When he headed off to join the Commission the expectation was that he would fare badly. The assumption was that this unreconstructed, unsophisticated, right-wing Mayo man would fail on the European stage. He didn't.

As I mentioned last week even Fergus Finlay admitted that he had a key role in securing billions of pounds for Ireland. He established a reputation for fighting for the rights of workers and, contrary to expectations, women. Most significantly, he managed to achieve an EU-wide ban on tobacco advertising in magazines and newspapers. To achieve this he had to take on one of the most sophisticated lobby groups in the world, the tobacco industry. Pee, you see, is made of stern stuff.

The current allegation against Flynn defies logic, in my view.

As I understand it, a developer claims he gave money to Padraig Flynn, designed for the ultimate use of the Fianna Fail party, which Flynn failed to deliver to party HQ.

Now, if Padraig Flynn had been handed a cheque for delivery to Mount Street and failed to do so the developer would have every right to be livid with him. On the contrary, however, there has been little sign of this from the developer over a very lengthy period.

Similarly, there is a puzzle that the man at the receiving end in Fianna Fail - or perhaps I should say non-receiving end - didn't pursue the supposed payment. Nothing seems to have been done about the undelivered money.

By contrast, when Ray Burke was found to have received money for the party that he hadn't passed on, Fianna Fail promptly asked him to hand it over. So, of course, Fianna Fail would, when these allegations arose, have approached Flynn for the £50,000. Except as far as I know they haven't. Why not?

The final problem I have with these allegations is that I know Padraig Flynn. He has no objection to legitimately receiving money, and he would be a keen fan of spending it, too. But Flynn is one of a dying breed, a politician for whom politics was never a career choice.

He is a politician for whom Fianna Fail really meant something. He has lived, breathed and slept Fianna Fail his entire life. It is part of his genetic code, an instinctive reaction. It is a creed so deeply ingrained in him as to make religious fanatics look wishy-washy. He could no more steal from Fianna Fail than a lion could go vegetarian.