WILL FRANCES RETURN TO HIGH OFFICE?
IN far-off early December, former tánaiste Frances Fitzgerald had to walk the political plank, or Fianna Fáil was going to jump ship. To cite context (a timeless favourite word in tribunal-land), Frances had to leave Cabinet because of a combination of circumstances.
They included the repeated misleading of the Dáil, a displeased Taoiseach, untrue assertions that all relevant material had been furnished to the Tribunal, a deliberate and repeated refusal to answer parliamentary questions, and then the revelation that Frances had been told of alleged dodgy doings a full year before they had caused a public furore.
The tánaiste had forgotten that email.
There was uproar in the chamber and on the airwaves, with the threatened fall of the House of Ushers. Until Frances’ head rolled
Political Editor and the sudden bloodlust was sated. Accountability before the bench is a very different beast to the brutal political version, however. And after six hours in the witness box over two days, with a comprehensive failure to do her any real damage in cross-examination, Frances may be capable of having high office bestowed on her once more — something Leo Varadkar has openly mooted.
There was a telling intervention after lunch yesterday when Judge Peter Charleton protested the posing of repeated questions about the alleged ‘aggressive’ stance of the gardaí against whistleblower Maurice McCabe, a description which he said had not been established in evidence.
He added: ‘People just fly out allegations and they stay there, and everybody says there’s no smoke without fire.’ The intervention could be seen as a propitious sign by the former tánaiste. For a while thereafter the questioning became boring.
During cross-examination Frances was reminded that Judge Kevin O’Higgins had found ‘some people wrongly and unfairly cast aspersions’ on Maurice McCabe.
She said: ‘I’m aware that he said that all right, but it wasn’t gone into in any detail. I saw that as support for Sgt McCabe.’
Lest the reference be seen as corroboration of a Garda policy to unfairly nobble McCabe with a false child sex abuse allegation, the judge next noted that the reference was to ‘some people’ and not ‘some parties’ to that commission. It is another interruption that could be seen as favouring Ms Fitzgerald, insofar as it indicates the general train of thought of the man who will decide matters.
Frances promptly charged for the gap, saying the wording was unclear, and could have referred to ‘any one of the witnesses’ or indeed to other people anywhere.
Next we had depressing questions about hypothetic questions. Frances said she had looked back at a Prime Time appearance she made last year, when she was asked what a commissioner might have done, when she had no information either way.
Her kicking to touch in that TV interview was seen by some as less than a full defence of Nóirín O’Sullivan. Frances declared however: ‘If I had been asked if I had confidence then in the commissioner, I would have said yes.’
Judge Charleton interrupted to suggest the minister could have been asked ‘a hypothetical question as to whether the Garda Commissioner had murdered her mother.’ A few titters escaped the audience.
It was clear that any evasions on Prime Time were not going to influence him.