News

How Bank of Ireland opened the gateway to private equity and morphed Ireland into a fertile habitat for cuckoos and vultures

Garda investigation of Leo Varadkar

FF was controlled by developers and FG tends to the will of property-owners but SF’s backroom regime is even more powerful than those in other big parties

Fissiparous DUP may give it a run for its money in May election

March/April 2022 19 scheme is purely for rental and does not meet the need for local residents and their community for housing which is integrated and provides for people of mixed incomes as well as appropriate social housing. The scheme includes provision for the required 10 per cent social and 10 per cent aordable housing. Rory Hearne of Maynooth University said the “mega build-to-rent scheme would essentially be a private enclave set apart from the local area, owned by overseas institutional investors”. “This is a reversion of 100 years in the social progress of land ownership and is part of a race to the bottom in the Irish housing system”. It also appears to conflict with an assurance by former Archbishop Diarmuid Martin in advance of the, Vatican-approved, Clonlie sale that the priority for the diocese was “to ensure the buildings and lands would be used for the benefit of the local community and a legacy for the city of Dublin”. The land deal certainly benefited the Church and the GAA which hailed it as the best in its history and “the key achievement for the year, if not the decade” in 2019. “The Archbishop was very anxious that he would sell to the GAA and he really wanted to deliver a social and aordable housing complement to that part of the city,” explained GAA stadium and commercial director, Peter McKenna. a hotel, two new pitches, a clubhouse and oce facilities on the 11 acres it has retained from the land deals. Instead of helping to resolve the housing crisis, as the church says it wants to do, many of the 120 parties who objected to the Hines application have argued that it will exacerbate the emergency. The €610 million Hines plan proposes 12 apartment blocks ranging from two storeys to 18 storeys in height on the former site of the former Holy Cross seminary and college. Among those with reservations was Dublin City Council which said that it was disappointed with “the disappointingly high quantum of single aspect and studio and one-bed units” which, it argued, “is not considered appropriate to the area and could constitute an unbalanced form of development”. DCC said the proposed 71 per cent of studio and one-bed units within the scheme “is alarming” adding that “it is considered unlikely the development will provide an attractive mixed-use sustainable neighbourhood….in compliance with the Dublin City Development Plan 2016-2022”. The local authority did not, however, recommend against the planning application. What must also concern the Catholic Archdiocese is the criticism of the Clonlie and Croke Park Residents Association that the T he move by the Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin to alter the zoning of lands where 33 churches are located across the city has once again raised the question of its potential role in the provision of aordable and social homes in the midst of a deep housing crisis. In mid-February, it lodged a 130-page submission in response to the Dublin City Council development plan opposing zoning rules which preclude housing or office developments in all but “highly exceptional” circumstances on such lands. In the document, solicitors Mason Hayes and Curran claimed that “the proposed changes are unlawful insofar as they affect religious institutions such as our client”. Some of the churches “are located in disadvantaged areas where the delivery of housing is taking priority over additional institutional land uses”, according to the planning consultants Brock McClure, which contributed to the church submission. The development comes after a request last year by housing minister, Darragh O’Brien, to the Catholic archbishop, Eamon Martin, to identify vacant buildings or lands which are owned by the Church and could be used to alleviate the housing crisis. In response, the retired bishop of Killaloe, Willie Walsh, agreed in August 2021 that the church should be doing everything it could to help address the housing crisis. “I would have always had the attitude that church land is not private property. church land is land belonging to the people. The people involved in the church. It is not belonging to the bishop or parish priests or that sort of thing. It is the people’s land and I think that anything the church can do to help the housing situation I think it should be there and trying to do it”, Walsh said. All well and good. Since then, however, the Dublin Archdiocese has come under intense criticism over the circumstances surrounding its sale, in 2019, of a 31.8-acre site at Clonlie Road to the GAA from which it netted a reported €95 million. According to its financial report for 2020, the Catholic Archdiocese received a further sum of almost €3 million due to a to a clause in its contract with the GAA that it would receive “a share in the profits made by the GAA if they sold on any of the lands or buildings to a third party”. The allocation followed the sale of 19 acres of the lands by the GAA to US investment fund Hines which has been granted planning permission by An Bord Pleanála to build almost 1600 ‘build to rent’ apartments on the site. It is understood that the GAA received €105 million for the lands it sold to Hines and plans to provide NEWS Rezoning for Mammon The Catholic Church had high ideals in getting its land rezoned but there is little sense its Clonliffe lands will be used for the common good By Frank Connolly

March/April 2022 17 around Moore Street was not reflected in the final recommendation. Claims that the compensation offer was conditional on accepting the Hammerson proposals have been rejected by ocials of the Council and the Department of Heritage with knowledge of the negotiations. Butcher, Stephen Troy, has claimed his business on Moore St will be severely disrupted during construction and received no oer of compensation from the developer. The representatives of the traders did not participate in the vote taken by the Advisory Group in relation to the Hammerson proposals before it published its recommendations in May 2021. The Taoiseach, Micheál Martin, has also been dragged into the controversy after he publicly endorsed the Hammerson project as the planning application was submitted to DCC. He confirmed that he attended a private meeting with Hammerson executives in April last year after which he provided a statement to the company for a press release it issued some weeks later. The Taoiseach was accompanied by the P lans to redevelop the north city centre from the GPO in O’Connell Street to Parnell Street and including the Moore Street fish and vegetable market have led to a fresh outbreak of hostilities on the historic site linked to the 1916 Rising. The lands, known as the Carlton site, have been the subject of prolonged planning controversy going back to the late 1990s when architect Paul Clinton, and a number of property owners on Upper O’Connell Street, sought to develop a retail scheme and conference centre. For almost three decades, the site has remained derelict and a monument to the neglect, by several governments and Dublin City Council (DCC), of the main street of the capital city. A row has recently erupted over a proposal to compensate 17 street traders, who hold licences issued by DCC, for any disruption to their business caused by UK developers Hammerson, which has been granted partial planning permission to build a large shopping, residential and oce complex on the largely disused landbank. Details of a scheme to give €1.5 million to the traders in compensation while construction work is underway were confirmed at a meeting of the Council in early February by DCC chief executive, Owen Keegan. Village has learned that this oer was raised to €1.7 million in early May 2021 following discussions between the Council and the traders and that an offer of further negotiations was made on Sunday, 20 February. However, tensions over the compensation issue were dramatically raised when it emerged that a planning consultant acting for the traders said that they wanted €34 to €40 million, or more than €2 million each, to move their stalls during the construction of the Hammerson scheme. A subsidiary of Hammerson, Dublin Central GP, had agreed to pay €1 million towards the compensation package, with the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage and DCC contributing £300,000 and €200,000, respectively, to the overall €1.5 million oer. In a statement in reply to a question by SF €34 to €40 million, or more than €2 million each, to move their stalls during the construction of the Hammerson scheme NEWS Hmmerson scheme, viewed from O’Connell Street Debate as to whether 30-year-derelict Carlton site should be developed though scheme demolishes much of the Moore St battle site By Frank Connolly RISING TENSIONS Councillor Micheál MacDonncha, Keegan said: “In the spring of 2021, prior to a planning application….Dublin City Council’s Housing & Community Services Department, Casual Trading Section began to engage in a commercially sensitive process to try and put a framework in place to compensate traders in the event of development. This was a tripartite framework with DCC, Department of Housing, Local Government & Heritage and Dublin Central GP Ltd. (Hammerson) partaking to compensate traders as all three…. brought forward proposals that may have an impact on traders over the coming years: DCC on the upgrading of Moore Street, the Dept. on the restoration of the National Monument as a commemorative centre and DCGP on the delivery of the Dublin Central site and Enabling Works for Metrolink”. The Council chief executive insisted that the process was “entirely separate from that of the Planning Authority and that the Planning Authority has no role in matters of compensation”. Two out of three planning applications relating to the Hammerson project were granted in late 2021 after an Advisory Group set up by the Government and including politicians, street traders and relatives of those who fought in the Rising recommended support for the commercial development. Some of those who participated in the advisory group have claimed that their opposition to the development which, they argue, will destroy much of the historic battlefield site Butcher, Stephen Troy speking t  recent ‘Sve Moore Street’ protest 18 March/April 2022 secretary general of his department, Martin Fraser, at the meeting on 19 April, 2021 with Connor Owens, Ireland Director of Hammerson, its development manager Ed Dobbs and architect Friedrich Ludewig. At the meeting, Owens set out the company’s vision of the scheme including the restoration of Upper O’Connell Street, pedestrian entrances to Moore Street through a new public square and its provision of works for a Metrolink station. He said that Hammerson would retain all pre-1916 buildings on Moore Street and construct a new archway to commemorate the Easter Rising. The development includes the construction of 94 new homes, 210 hotel rooms, retail outlets, restaurants, oces and shops. In a press release by Hammerson in early June announcing its decision to lodge the planning application, Micheál Martin was quoted as welcoming the rejuvenation plans, which, he said, “will enhance the status of O’Connell Street by developing new transport links and delivering new homes, retail facilities and oces which will boost employment in the area. The locations around Moore St and the GPO will see an increasing number of visitors who will be drawn into the seminal role it played in our history”. He added that “it is important to continue to liaise with the street traders and those

14 March/April 2022 I N  the chairman of ISME (the small and medium enterprise lobbyist), Seamus Butler, wildly alleed that – in my capacity as CEO of ISME – I’d been involved in fraud of the EU by submittin unpaid invoices for payment of EU rants. In fact, unknown to me and after ISME had claimed the rant, the EU chaned its rules, to prohibit what was formerly standard practice – its own acceptance of such unpaid invoices – across the EU. It was that chane that ave credibility to the alleation. Butler and others in ISME wanted to et rid of me, since I adamantly opposed ISME’s involve- ment in the social partnership process which was becomin central to its operations. Butler’s supporters were actually in private discussions with Mary Harney, Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, concernin her decision to include ISME in the partnership process despite my opposition. I had not been informed. Since I had the overwhelmin support of the members and I had refused the inducement of £,-plus to resin, ettin rid of me was not oin to be easy. Butler, however, was willin to o to considerable lenths to destroy my character and thus directweaken my authority. So, as explicitly threatened, Butler implemented threats to ensure that I would “never work in this country aain” by makin “poor controls and manaement…. look like fraud”. To that end he conspired in  to brin phoney complaints to the Garda. Nevertheless in , despite the prior faxed threats and to everyone’s The State, led by Micheál Martin, lied and destroyed me By Frank Mulcahy Martin said he’d correct his statements implicating me in fraud after the EU showed that far from committing fraud I’d been set up by his department, but didn’t a) to protect a party colleague and b) to protect the exchequer from a maladministration claim. Indeed the State eventually effected a useless Inquiry process to cover the scandal up NEWS Fax from accountants confirming ISME leaders Hynes, Hobdell and O’Loinsigh threatened in 1998 that “Frank Mulcahy’s name will be blackened, he will never work in this country again”. surprise, his alleations were treated seriously and forwarded to the DPP. In the end no prosecution was recommended. Two years later, after an inter – nal ISME report concluded that Butler had justified his alleations by discreetly corruptin previously audited accounts, I endeavoured to enae March/April 2022 15 Deprtment of Finnce briefing note confirms tht, fter deprtment lobbied, it EU Commission committed to not replying to further correspondence from Mulchy with the Garda. Respondin, the Garda authorities declined to accept a copy of that report. They dismissed my complaint of audit corruption as “impossible”. In  Micheál Martin as the Minister for Enterprise, when replyin to Deputy Ruairi Quinn and others, emphatically endorsed the basis of Seamus Butler’s complaint. The Department wrote that its Minister was actin in “absolute” ood faith. We had no reason to doubt that. Further we knew of no relationship between the Department, its Minister and Seamus Butler which miht have explained that endorsement. However, in  after we established further unsettlin evidence , Assistant Commissioner of the Garda, the later discredited Martin Callinan, undertook to reinvestiate the alleations levelled by Butler. He ave a “per- sonal uarantee” as to the thorouhness of that reinvestiation. Time passed. It proved that Callinan was not a ood bet on a personal uarantee. In November , when no investiation ensued, I made technically unauthorised email contact with the civilian forensic accountant to the Garda, Dave McManus. He was straihtforward. He endorsed what ISME had concluded in its private report in . That was damnin of his Garda colleaues and particularly of Martin Callinan’s stated position. I immediately wrote to Callinan notin that the Garda’s forensic account – ant’s contradiction amounted in law to admission that the Garda had enaed in collusion with Butler. However, when I met the investiatin ardaí in December  they extraordinarily denied any contact with their forensic accountant. Immedi- ately after that meetin the forensic accountant was sent to Coventry, my emails were blocked by the Garda and I was prevented from ever aain con – tactin the forensic accountant or any ocer by their direct email address. Despite repeat enquiries by Assistant Commissioner Noirin O’ Sullivan, by the GSOC and in  by the Minister for Justice, the Garda adamantly denied the block. This interdiction lasted ten years until . This was accepted recently in his report by Jude McMahon, appointed. Faced with an inexplicable wall of hostility by aents of the State, I eventu – ally turned in despair to the EU Commission for clarity. It was then that I slowly pieced toether the tale of how the Department of Finance had been locked in a battle with the European Commission since  because of the EU demand that the Irish exchequer “repay” over one billion euros in European rants. That repayment demand arose from the Department of Enterprise’s “systematic maladministration” of EU rants since  and the“overlappin” drawdown (EU code for double charin) of EU Cohesion funds. In / the Department of Finance endeavoured to prevent the EU Commission from communicatin directly with me [top riht] Memo. Indeed they recorded that they had secured that commitment. However, as if in a studied response, three months later the EU Commission wrote and dis- closed that the culpable party (in respect of Butler’s alleation) had been the Department of Enterprise, itself. The EU Commission specifically exon – erated me. In a second email the Commission oered to ive evidence to Martin Callinan and any relevant Irish Authority. Here’s the email: “From: Brian Gray <Brian.Gray@ec.europa.eu> To: mulcahyfm@eircom.net Cc: ruairi quinn <ruairi.quinn@oireachtas.ie>, eamon ilmore Sent: Mon,  Jul  :: + (IST) Subject: RE: Brian Gray Dir General, Int Audit Services, EU Comm Dear Mr Mulcahy, I confirm my availability to reply to any questions your interlocutors may have on the requirements of EC reulations as reards the declaration of