As of last night, the claim that Ms Beverley Cooper Flynn had knowingly helped her father evade tax remained unproven. Ms Cooper Flynn's defence of her actions, in a personal statement to the Dáil yesterday evening, was coherent enough to lead the Opposition to hold off the usual calls for her head until they had time to consider what she had said, writes Mark Brennock, Chief Political Correspondent
Fianna Fáil's own ethics committee will discuss the matter today, but is almost certain to take no action. No move against the Mayo deputy is likely on the basis of the press revelations of her role in assisting her father to invest half of the £50,000 he received from Mr Tom Gilmartin in offshore accounts. The pressure is at least temporarily off the Taoiseach to take action against her.
Mr Ahern yesterday came the closest yet to expressing disapproval for the acceptance by Mr Flynn of the £50,000 from Mr Gilmartin. Receiving such a cheque made out to cash was "extraordinary", he said. Obviously, he said, the question arises: "What was it all about?" For Ms Cooper Flynn, yesterday may have brought only a temporary reprieve.
Next week the Supreme Court will hear Ms Cooper Flynn's appeal against the loss of her libel action in March 2001 against RTÉ. In its verdict, the High Court found she had advised or encouraged people not to pay tax.
The Taoiseach told the Dáil yesterday that Ms Cooper-Flynn was readmitted to the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party after a period outside it on the grounds that she had lodged an appeal. Losing the appeal, therefore, is now likely to lead to calls for her expulsion.
In addition, Ms Cooper Flynn is expected to be among those giving evidence to the Mahon tribunal on this matter. A negative finding against her there would also be likely to lead to her expulsion from the parliamentary party.
Ms Cooper-Flynn yesterday addressed the specific question of whether advice and help she gave her father to invest £25,000 offshore amounted to knowingly helping him to evade tax.
She insisted that everything she did was within the law. In October 1989, her father asked her to advise him on investing £25,000, she said. This was half of the amount of the controversial cheque that Mr Padraig Flynn had received from the property developer Tom Gilmartin. It had also been lodged in a bogus non-resident account before Ms Cooper-Flynn's advice was sought.
However, the Mayo deputy told the Dáil yesterday that he did not tell her where the money had come from, and she did not know. She played no part in setting up any bogus non-resident account for her father. Her statement did not address whether she knew the £25,000 to be invested came from a bogus non-resident account.
She recommended three funds in which the money should be invested. All three were legal in Ireland and licensed to sell their products here. When giving him the advice, she also sent the relevant form to be completed in order to comply with exchange control regulations. This form was to notify the Central Bank of such offshore transactions.
She says she told her father "that the investments would be confidential and not disclosable by the bank to any tax authority". However, she says she also "notified Padraig Flynn of his personal tax obligations".
She wrote to him: "In the hands of the investor there is liability to income tax on distributions and on encashment after the investment period, the proceeds are subject to capital gains tax. Of course, it is up to the individual investor to disclose the investment to the taxing authorities." She also advised him of the exchange control requirements, and the exchange control forms were duly completed.
In short, she says she didn't own the money, she told him of his requirements to pay tax, she ensured exchange control rules were complied with and she neither assisted nor engaged in tax evasion. "I believe that I fulfilled all my legal and ethical obligations in relation to these investments", she concluded.
The subdued opposition reaction last night to Ms Cooper Flynn's statement confirmed that it was indeed coherent and plausible. However, it is Ms Cooper Flynn's track record that will lead to her account being studied very carefully indeed.
The High Court concluded in her libel action against RTÉ that she had indeed assisted or encouraged people to evade tax. She therefore has "form" in this regard.
In addition, there is a prima facie case that her father Padraig Flynn sought to avoid paying tax on the £50,000 he received from Tom Gilmartin. But it has not been shown that Ms Cooper Flynn knowingly assisted him in this regard.
However, she must still get through the Supreme Court appeal in relation to her lost libel action and intense scrutiny at the Mahon tribunal before knowing whether she has a prospect of a political future within Fianna Fáil.