It would be very difficult to accuse Fine Gael TD Mr Bernard Durkan of going too hard or too easy on ACC Bank at the ail Committee of Public Accounts DIRT inquiry.
Mr Durkan and the other members of the committee have made considerable progress in teasing out why bogus non-resident accounts were a rampant phenomenon between 1986 and 1998. This has been achieved as a result of painstaking research and a growing understanding of the most pertinent questions to pose to the various witnesses.
After the embarrassing disclosure yesterday of a financial settlement between Mr Durkan and ACC some years ago, committee chairman Mr Jim Mitchell TD has come out fighting. The facts of the £20,000 interest write-off by the bank for the Fine Gael TD had been disclosed to the committee's legal team and it decided the matter didn't constitute a conflict of interest for the deputy in questioning ACC's executives. Today, he will continue his questioning of ACC with the full support of his colleagues.
ACC Bank came before the committee with a lot of explaining to do.
The Comptroller and Auditor General's report suggested the State-owned bank had been one of the most active institutions when it came to opening bogus non-resident accounts during the 12-year period being considered.
The report contains an estimate from the bank's firm of auditors, Ernst & Young, which shows ACC could have a DIRT liability of up to £17.5 million. If this was proven, the committee has determined that £170 million in "hot money" was concealed in accounts at the State bank.
The bank has repeatedly rejected the Comptroller and Auditor General's findings but its performance before the committee hasn't been impressive.
In response to the committee's probing, the bank was shown to have fostered a culture of non-compliance with DIRT legislation. A general disregard for the bank's board of directors by management was also highlighted.
Mr Durkan was the first committee member to question ACC chief executive Mr John McCloskey last week.
The chief executive was a difficult witness in so far as his answers tended to be long and not always addressing the question. Mr McCloskey repeatedly mentioned the bank's dire financial position in the 1980s and used his time to convey the points he believed the committee should hear.
Mr McCloskey was anxious to explain that the bank was more taken up with staying solvent than strictly adhering to its compliance obligations. He told Mr Durkan he had taken steps to improve compliance as soon as the bank got its head above water.
Mr Durkan methodically took Mr McCloskey through the various parts of the Comptroller and Auditor General's report to get answers to his questions and quickly reminded him to stick to the point. "With respect, we have a fairly good potted version of what the corporation did as a financial institution . . . So I would prefer a direct answer," he said.
He showed a similar impatience with the bank's firm of auditors, Ernst & Young, when it sought to play down the significance of its uncovering of a potential £17.5 million DIRT liability.
Following vigorous questioning of the Ernst & Young tax adviser, Mr Declan O'Neill, Mr Durkan established that Mr O'Neill attended a meeting with the Revenue and ACC officials and conveyed that non-compliance was no longer a major problem at the bank. This meeting took place shortly after the firm had uncovered ACC's potential £17.5 million liability. "You must have been a good poker player. You had information that affected the solvency of the institution and withheld it from the Revenue," Mr Durkan suggested to Mr O'Neill.
The six committee members have their individual adversarial style to elicit information from a witnesses. The chairman, Mr Jim Mitchell, keeps the proceedings moving and will often row in behind one of his colleagues to remind an evasive witness that they are under oath and insist they answer the question.
Mr Pat Rabbitte can always be relied on for sound-bites and colourful contributions. During his exchanges, he manages to convey disdain, disbelief and downright displeasure with certain witnesses.
Over the past two weeks, Mr Durkan and Mr Sean Ardagh have become more sure-footed in their questioning and have exhibited a greater level of confidence.
Mr Mitchell has made it clear the committee won't be distracted and it will be business as usual with ACC again today.