Why Ahern deserves one last chance to explain himself
Related Articles
Here we go again. The scene is set once more for Taoiseach Bertie Ahern to explain his way out of the trouble caused by the latest revelations about his personal finances.
It's the third time Mr Ahern has found himself in this scenario in a little over 18 months.
Yet again the Taoiseach is faced with presenting a case that will save his political career.
There is a distinct pattern emerging.
Every time fresh claims emerge relating to the Mahon Tribunal's investigations, Mr Ahern attempts to brazen it out, keep the head down, respond in patches and hope it will go away.
After the initial bombshell dropped in September 2006 about Mr Ahern receiving irregular payments, it took him almost a fortnight to conduct his celebrated Bryan Dobson interview and explain the loans from friends in Dublin and gifts from strangers in Manchester.
During the 2007 general election campaign, as further damaging details came to light, it was again a fortnight before he addressed the concerns through a lengthy statement and an interview with the 'Sunday Independent'.
The initial ostrich-in-the-sand tactic didn't work either time, so it's a mystery why Mr Ahern thought it would come off following Grainne Carruth's contradictory evidence.
On the two previous occasions, the Taoiseach has, largely speaking, thrown himself at the mercy of the court of public opinion. He cited his marital breakdown in the mid-1980s as the explanation for his bizarre management of his personal finances.
Sympathy
It proved to be an effective approach but the well of sympathy has now arguably run dry.
He wouldn't dare try it again.
By claiming he was putting everything on the public record in the past, Mr Ahern ran the risk of new developments causing disquiet.
Ms Carruth's acceptance she did indeed lodge £15,000 sterling into savings accounts on Mr Ahern's behalf counts as such a new development.
The quite different difficulty this time out for Mr Ahern is that he has already provided a different explanation -- these were merely salary cheques and, besides, he never dealt in large amounts of foreign currency aside from Manchester-related house transactions.
Mr Ahern now has to provide an alternate explanation.
The calls for this clarification came -- albeit reluctantly -- from the leaders of his coalition partners, Mary Harney of the PDs and John Gormley of the Green Party.
Neither minister appears to want to be in this situation.
The past experiences of Enda Kenny, Pat Rabbitte and Michael McDowell would suggest it is a dangerous and thankless task to demand such answers.
Perhaps Mr Ahern took it for granted that his Cabinet colleagues wouldn't go there.
The silence from the Government partners over aspects of his testimony since last September would suggest he had good grounds to believe he was safe from pressure on this front.
Nonetheless, if he thought so, he was wrong and the contradictions thrown up eight days ago proved a step too far.
As of now, it appears Leader's Questions in the Dail next week will provide him with the forum to clarify his evidence.
Mr Ahern chose to take the sting out of the tail of past Leinster House showdowns by putting out his excuses beforehand, so it remains to be seen if he will break his silence again before Wednesday.
In essence, Mr Ahern deserves his chance to provide his explanation.
Patience is wearing thin though, so his response needs to be credible.
Simply saying he cashed the salary cheques, converted the money into sterling and then decided to transfer it back into punts and lodge it, would result in Mr Ahern subjecting himself to ridicule.
The lack of an explanation to date doesn't augur well.
If that's the best he can do, his Government colleagues will have to reflect upon the consequences.
For now, though, let's wait and see what exactly the man has got to say before drawing conclusions.
- FIONNAN SHEAHAN
