The Tanaiste and the Minister for Finance face tough Dail questioning next week after revelations that they discussed a £150 million rail project with Mr Ulick McEvaddy only weeks before holidaying in his villa in the South of France.
Both Fine Gael and Labour will demand time on the first day of the new Dail term on September 29th to question Ms Harney and Mr McCreevy on their dealings with the millionaire businessman.
The two Opposition parties last night called on the Ministers to exempt themselves from any Cabinet decisions relating to the McEvaddys. Fine Gael called on the Taoiseach, Mr Ahern, to order a full investigation into "all potential pending Government decisions affecting the Ministers and the McEvaddys".
The Sunday Tribune yesterday reported that Mr McEvaddy met Mr McCreevy on May 11th to brief him on a proposal to put together a consortium of semistate and private investors to build and operate a new rail link from Dublin city to the airport.
In a statement last night the Tanaiste said that she, too, had met Mr McEvaddy in July in connection with his rail proposal, as part of the Government's Public/Private Partnership initiative.
Neither Minister volunteered this information when the controversy over their stay in the McEvaddy villa erupted three weeks ago.
Mr McEvaddy briefed both Ministers on his proposal for the multi-million-pound rail link, which would run through land he owns at Huntstown, close to Dublin Airport, where he wants to build a second air terminal.
A Government decision to approve the rail project would enhance the prospects of a second air terminal being located on the McEvaddys' land. It would also greatly increase the land's value for commercial development.
The rail proposal is being considered under the PPP initiative, which will form a large part of the National Development Plan.
PPPs are a mechanism whereby the State can raise funds for infrastructural investment. There are currently no guidelines or regulations covering such projects. Unlike other State contracts, no requirement exists for a PPP proposal to go to tender, and any decision to proceed with a particular project is taken by the Cabinet.
A spokeswoman for Mr McCreevy said that the Minister was asked by the Sunday Tribune, under the Freedom of Information Act, if he had made any representations on behalf of Mr McEvaddy. The answer was that he had not. However, arising from this request, the Minister volunteered the information about the May meeting. His spokeswoman said that he had no further comment to make.
The Tanaiste said yesterday that her meeting in July with Mr McEvaddy had been sought by consultant Dr Con Power on Mr McEvaddy's behalf and was one of a number of such meetings she had had with parties about the rail link. "Following the meeting with Mr McEvaddy, I made neither representations nor took any action. Indeed, in Government, I have supported proposals which run counter to those being pursued by him in relation to both light rail and airports policy."
Both Ministers were among a party which spent a week in August in a villa near Nice owned by one of Mr McEvaddy's companies.
The Fine Gael spokesman on public enterprise, Mr Ivan Yates, accused the two Ministers of openly flouting Cabinet guidelines in relation to hospitality and of breaching the spirit of the ethics legislation.
Labour's spokesman, Mr Pat Rabbitte, said it was most unwise of the Ministers to have availed of the corporate hospitality of a businessman involved in a major proposed infrastructural project.
A Government spokesman said last night that the Taoiseach trusted all of his Ministers to comply with the ethics requirements of members of his Cabinet.