Mystery of the missing adviser

Almost exactly three years ago (on July 15th, 1997) Charles Haughey first gave evidence to a tribunal at Dublin Castle, the McCracken tribunal. He had opened that evidence with a prepared statement in the course of which he said: "Throughout my public life the late Mr Des Traynor was my trusted friend and financial adviser. He was held in very high esteem in business circles and was widely regarded as a financial expert of exceptional ability. I never had to concern myself about my personal finances. He took over control of my financial affairs from about 1960 onwards. He sought, as his personal responsibility, to ensure that I would be free to devote my time and ability to public life and that I would not be distracted from my political work by financial concerns."

He said this by way of explaining how it was that he was unaware at the time that Ben Dunne had given him £1.3 million while he was Taoiseach.

He was asked by Denis McCullough, counsel for the McCracken tribunal, if he would have asked Des Traynor from time to time how things were going, how much money there was, how he was managing the finances. Mr Haughey said: "No. But, on the converse side, he might say to me from time to time, `we're having some difficulties, but I'll take care of it.' "

Mr Haughey went on to say to the McCracken tribunal: "My private finances were peripheral to my life. I left them to Mr Traynor to look after. I didn't have any problems in regard to them and I left the matter at that."

Asked if he was ever conscious of there being any dipping in his finances or any need to tighten his belt or pull back from spending money, he said: "No, that didn't arise."

That was three years ago.

The following has been established by the Moriarty tribunal over the last two days:

A meeting took place between Mr Haughey and the then manager of the Dame Street branch of AIB, Michael Phelan, on September 13th, 1976, at which Mr Haughey made detailed proposals for the reduction of his overall indebtedness (then at £500,000 in total, of which £300,000 was with AIB) and during which he undertook to live within his income without further bank drawing for seven years. When asked if he could do this, he replied: "I would have to." His indebtedness had increased by £90,000 over the previous year.

On the following day, September 14th, 1976, he had a meeting with the then chairman of AIB and other senior bank officials and, although it appears that the purpose of the meeting may not have been to discuss Mr Haughey's indebtedness to the bank, this was discussed, and a proposal made by Mr Haughey was declined.

On October 1st, 1976 a meeting took place between Mr Haughey and AIB officials - this was the meeting at which Mr Haughey reportedly said he could be a "very troublesome adversary" (He has denied saying this.)

On December 8th, 1976, a meeting took place between Mr Haughey and AIB officials at which Mr Haughey made further detailed proposals on how to reduce his debt, which by this stage had reached £340,000.

On December 20th, 1976, Mr Haughey sent a letter to AIB outlining his proposals for dealing with the debt and seeking further accommodation from the bank. The bank replied to him on January 12th, 1977, granting him the facilities requested, but stressing that in no circumstances could his indebtedness exceed £350,000. He was asked to sign a confirmation of his acceptance of the terms outlined and he did so.

On March 28th, 1977, a further meeting took place between Mr Haughey and AIB officials, when it emerged that his indebtedness had risen to £401,929, plus interest of almost £50,000. At this meeting he was threatened for the first time that his cheques would be dishonoured.

On December 1st, 1978, a meeting took place between Michael Phelan, the AIB manager, and Mr Haughey at Mr Haughey's office. By this time his indebtedness to the bank had risen to over £600,000.

So it emerges that during a time when his financial situation was deteriorating rapidly, at a time when the bank was threatening to withdraw his chequebook and dishonour his cheques, six meetings took place between Mr Haughey and the bank and Des Traynor attended none of them.

All the dealings were done by Mr Haughey alone; the bank's sole contact in relation to his finances was himself.

During all this time, when he was clearly in dire financial difficulty, Des Traynor was nowhere to be seen. True, Des Traynor did take part in two meetings with him prior to 1976, and Des Traynor had some contact on his behalf with the bank prior to 1976, but in the period of most difficulty in the management of his financial affairs Des Traynor was absent.

Towards the conclusion of his evidence yesterday Mr Haughey sought to explain the absence of Des Traynor from all of this. He said Des Traynor was in the background and could well have had discussions with the bank aside from his discussions, but neither Des Traynor nor the bank ever mentioned such discussions to him.

And, inexorably, counsel for the tribunal, John Coughlan, is getting towards the crucial period - January 1980 - just after Charles Haughey had become Taoiseach, when, miraculously, all his financial problems with AIB were resolved - by that stage his indebtedness had risen to over £1 million. Patrick Gallagher arrived on the scene with £300,000, the bank wrote off a huge amount, delighted to be rid of their troublesome customer, and from outer space there emerged a further £300,000.

And, because Charles Haughey had had nothing to do with the management of his financial affairs, he had no idea where this money came from.

vbrowne@irish-times.ie