MAHON TRIBUNAL:AN ARCHITECT involved in the Quarryvale project paid the late Liam Lawlor £50,000 in 1994 to help him with a business in Prague, the Mahon tribunal heard yesterday.
Ambrose Kelly acknowledged the regular payments, in sums of between £1,000 and £3,000, were probably made in cash.
The planning tribunal was questioning Mr Kelly as part of the Quarryvale II module, an investigation into allegations of corruption surrounding the rezoning of land on which the Liffey Valley shopping centre in west Dublin was built.
Mr Lawlor was a supporter of the Quarryvale project and had been given money by Quarryvale developer Owen O'Callaghan and his lobbyist, Frank Dunlop.
Counsel for the tribunal, Patricia Dillon SC, said Mr Lawlor told the tribunal that the £50,000 was lodged to his own account and the account of his wife, Hazel Lawlor.
Mr Kelly said he was attempting to set up a practice in Prague and had begun the enterprise, but matters were progressing slowly.
Mr Lawlor, whom he met through the Quarryvale project, suggested that he travel to Prague on behalf of Ambrose Kelly International and help to move the project forward.
"What was Mr Lawlor's expertise in middle European affairs, Mr Kelly?" Ms Dillon asked.
"His expertise was his ability to bring people together . . . to push things forward," Mr Kelly replied.
Mr Lawlor did bring the project to the stage of signing contracts on a building in Prague and Mr Kelly said he put down a deposit.
However, "the legal people" let him down and he lost his money.
Mr Kelly said Mr Lawlor also used his influence in the council, for good or for bad, even after he had lost his seat there in June 1991. "He was a strong political machine . . . quite a force in just verbal conversation and debate," he said.
"Would you agree that if you didn't have Liam Lawlor on-side, he could turn that machine to work against you?" Ms Dillon asked.
"Oh yes," Mr Kelly said.
The tribunal was also told Mr Kelly was given two £10,000 payments in 1992 by Mr O'Callaghan, one so that he could repay a loan to a friend and the other to cover the cost of Mr O'Callaghan sleeping in his home.
The payments were written up as planning and professional fees in the project's accounts.
A third payment from Mr O'Callaghan, of £10,000, was recorded as made to Mr Kelly in July 1994, Ms Dillon said.
Mr Kelly said the money was not for him. He said Mr O'Callaghan needed cash and he agreed to cash a cheque for him.
"He said he wanted it for something to do with the horse show," Mr Kelly said.
He cashed the cheque and then gave Mr O'Callaghan the money.
Ms Dillon said Mr O'Callaghan had said it was never his practice to deal in cash and that he never cashed any cheques.
"I can't be responsible for what Mr O'Callaghan said, but that's what it was," Mr Kelly said.
