It's not often you sit in a room listening to someone say they made more than £100 million from a particular deal. But that is what Mr Dermot Desmond said when he returned yesterday to give further evidence to the Moriarty tribunal.
His earlier evidence concerned his dealings with Mr Charles Haughey; this time he was here to talk about Esat Digifone. Mr Desmond said all the shares in Esat Digifone formerly held by IIU Nominees Ltd were held for him. The nominee company, which is linked to his company IIU Ltd, had 20 per cent of the company in May 1996.
He was questioned by Mr Jerry Healy SC, for the tribunal, about inquiries made in October-November 1997 when the directors of Esat Digifone investigated suggestions or concerns that Mr Michael Lowry might have been given money by Esat Digifone or another of its shareholders, Telenor.
Mr Desmond's evidence was clear. It was decided everything that could be done to prove or disprove the suggestions would be done, and after that it would be up to the directors to make the call. Overhanging the whole exercise, for him, was his certainty "that Mr Lowry couldn't have influenced the granting of the licence" to Digifone.
He had thought concerns about the $50,000 donation to Fine Gael, paid to the late David Austin, could be settled by simply asking Fine Gael for a receipt. He thought this had been agreed and didn't know it had not been done.
In relation to the suggestion that Mr Denis O'Brien might have paid Mr Lowry £100,000, he decided to accept Mr O'Brien's word that this had not occurred, after all the checks agreed had failed to turn up any evidence to the contrary.
It was Mr Eoin Fitzsimons SC, for Telenor, who asked Mr Desmond the straight question: How much did IIU make out of Esat Digifone? "Over £100 million," the entrepreneur replied. Mr Desmond's being so rich did not prevent Mr Fitzsimons from turning up the heat a little in what had until then been a businesslike session.
He explained to Mr Desmond that his client, Telenor, said it paid $50,000 to Mr Austin at the instigation of Mr O'Brien and on behalf of Esat Digifone. Mr O'Brien says the money was paid by Telenor on its own behalf. Mr Desmond said he had formed the view the payment was made on behalf of Telenor.
Telenor had made the payment, Mr Desmond explained, and it had never told IIU Nominees, a 20 per cent shareholder in Digifone, that the extremely sensitive payment was being made on behalf of Digifone.
Mr Fitzsimons responded by pointing out that everyone agreed Mr O'Brien had initiated the payment. So had Mr Desmond a complaint about Mr O'Brien not informing IIU? "I do," said Mr Desmond. So why decide Telenor made the payment on its own behalf and not on behalf of Digifone? Mr Fitzsimons asked. Because Telenor made the payment out of its accounts, said Mr Desmond.
It was at this stage it was asked how much money Mr Desmond's company had made out of "the whole affair". When Mr Desmond said over £100 million, Mr Fitzsimons asked who brought him into the deal. Mr O'Brien, said Mr Desmond, to which Mr Fitzsimons commented: "So you're sticking by him." Mr Desmond, seemingly amused, said: "Yes. I am sticking by Denis O'Brien."
Then, when all of this was over, some of the more interesting parts of Mr Desmond's evidence emerged. He or his company assumed responsibility for Esat Digifone's costs from the licence competition bid in August 1995, he said.
The announcement that Digifone had won was made in October 1995. In May 1996 the licence was formally awarded. The awarding of the licence is to be inquired into by the tribunal.
Mr Healy said the process had two phases: first, a competition which involved civil servants and outside consultants, and second, the negotiations between Digifone and Mr Lowry's Department. These are matters we are all going to learn more about in the autumn.