The co-owner of Celtic Helicopters John Barnicle has said that he and his business partner Ciarán Haughey did not pay money into a "slush fund" in relation to land near Dublin airport which they had purchased as part of a consortium.
Giving evidence at the Mahon tribunal yesterday, Mr Barnicle said that he and Mr Haughey had borrowed £185,000 for a 15 per cent share in the land.
The land was bought by a consortium known as Cargobridge which wanted to develop warehousing on the site.
Mr Barnicle said that he and Mr Haughey had paid £151,000 for their share of the deal and that the balance had been used to cover other expenses.
Mr Barnicle and Mr Haughey had purchased their share through a company known as Abervanta.
Mr Barnicle said there was no slush fund and that the balance of the money remaining had only been paid out on the basis of invoices drawn up by other members of the consortium.
He said they had either approved the invoices over the phone or had then sent on to solicitor Noel Smyth, who had arranged the loan for the land purchase.
He said they had borrowed £30,000 more than the purchase price because they believed that there would be other bills for stamp duty, legal fees and property fees and for research on sewage.
Mr Barnicle said he and Mr Haughey believed that they had borrowed the £185,000 from businessman Ben Dunne and had been unaware that the money had actually come from a loan.
Mr Barnicle agreed with counsel for the tribunal Pat Quinn SC that after they had been approached about the lands, they had contacted Mr Dunne and that without signing one document or putting their hands in their pocket, they had been able to acquire the property and in addition have £30,000 available for any expenses that might arise.
Mr Haughey said that before he received information from the tribunal, he had been unaware that the lobbyist Frank Dunlop had had an involvement with the Cargobridge lands.
Counsel for the tribunal Patricia Dillon SC said that in 1993, an invoice had been sent to Abervanta containing, among other items, an invoice for £379 as the company's share of a payment to an "F Dunlop".
Mr Haughey said: "If you are trying to suggest that I saw that invoice and knew of Mr Dunlop's involvement, that is not the case". Ms Dillon contended that after the purchase price of the land and other bills were taken care of, that Abervanta had £16,000 in funding for planning/rezoning expenses.
She maintained that as Abervanta had to meet 15 per cent of the total cost, this suggested that the consortium had more than £100,000 for this endeavour.
