It is now only a matter of time before many of the details of the controversial Ansbacher deposits are brought into the public domain. Two full investigations of the deposits are under way. One is being undertaken by the Moriarty Tribunal, although its terms of reference remain a matter of contention between the Government and the Opposition parties. And an authorised officer appointed by the Tanaiste, Ms Harney, is also examining details of the deposits with a brief to identify any breaches in company, exchange control or tax law.
The Tanaiste's investigation received a boost yesterday when Irish Intercontinental Bank agreed to hand over its records of the Ansbacher deposits. The bank had threatened to seek a judicial review of the Tanaiste's power to seek this information, but told the court yesterday that it was now satisfied that she was entitled to ask for it. The officer already has access to files from Guinness & Mahon, the other Irish bank where the deposits were held for many years, before being transferred to the Irish Intercontinental Bank.
The authorised officer is Mr Gerard Ryan, one of Ms Harney's civil servants. He must now sift through the information from the two banking groups. The report of the McCracken Tribunal showed that the records of the beneficial owners of the deposits were kept in a most unorthodox way and it remains to be seen just how much can be gleaned from the files which Mr Ryan will examine, and which will also be looked at by the Moriarty Tribunal.
However, it is reasonable to assume that Mr Ryan will be able to establish an accurate picture of the operation of the deposits, the amounts of money involved, the motivation of the depositors and, in many cases, their identities. Once this work is complete it is up to Ms Harney - and, presumably, the Government - to decide what to do with it.
The Tanaiste, in her position as Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, has strong powers under the Companies Act of 1990. She can forward the findings of her authorised officer to the Revenue Commissioners, the Central Bank or the Director of Public Prosecutions, if she feels this is appropriate. Another route open to her would be to seek the appointment of an inspector, who would be vested with strong powers to investigate and report on the deposits.
Another option which the Tanaiste may consider, depending on the findings of Mr Ryan, is to bring a summary prosecution herself, because of possible breaches of company law. By doing this, she would not only seek court judgement on any alleged breaches, but would also allow many of the details of the workings of the deposits to be revealed in court.
However, the Tanaiste and her officers must proceed carefully. It is essential that any investigation of the deposits does not leave the Government open to the charge of acting unfairly or seeking to gain political advantage. But there are legitimate questions in relation to the Ansbacher deposits which must be answered in the public interest. Their discovery - and the revelation in the McCracken report that they totalled up to £38 million - has led to quite legitimate suspicions that they were employed as a vehicle to evade tax.
The operation of the accounts almost certainly breached exchange control legislation and there may also have been contraventions of company law. For these reasons, it is essential that the deposits be fully investigated and that the public be allowed to learn about their operation.