Can Ahern survive as tensions rise?

HALFWAY through another week with more calls for the Taoiseach's resignation amidst another display of Bertie Ahern's followers clinging onto his defence of his bizarre story on large amounts of money he received from very generous strangers who just happened to be businessmen.

Very unusual businessmen indeed, with selective amnesia, who never count money, never look at receipts, only give large sums of cash to government ministers on the basis they get nothing in return and occasionally leaving property in their will to acquaintances outside of their family circle. Welcome to the Twilight Zone.

Anyone who seriously believes the Taoiseach's explanation in this Monty Python-esque saga is either glib or else wrongly believes they might benefit career-wise from Fianna Fail staying in power led by Bertie Ahern, despite the entire Cabinet coming under the spotlight for signs of shaky party discipline and instability.

Mr Ahern, who recently spent 17 hours over four days in the witness box at the tribunal, dealing with cash lodgements in the 1990s, said after he completed his testimony during the latest phase of the inquiry that he was happy with his performance. How could he be happy? Who in their right mind would be happy under such intense scrutiny and subsequent pressure to resign, in what now appears to be political goods damaged beyond repair?

The Opposition are repeating their call for the Taoiseach's head. This was always a cynical move and obviously not voiced because it is the right thing to do, morally, but more of a strategy.

Still, rather than dwell on 'damned if they do, damned if they don't', getting to the heart of the matter is now what the public and politicians should be striving for.

Enda Kenny, who should also have been more critical during the general election, has reminded us that Mr Ahern once said that for Charles Haughey to accept money was wrong, for former minister Ivor Callely to have his house painted was wrong, but for he himself to have accepted money for personal use "was not improper".

Did the Taoiseach mean not improper because, at the time, he was a homeless minister for finance who cashed his pay-cheque in the local pub in Drumcondra and had no bank account? Or perhaps not improper because he claims he was all alone and was going through a separation, even though his marriage had ended over six years previously in the late 1980s and he was in a relationship with Celia Larkin?

Are we asked to believe that all the unusual, significant incidents surrounding Mr Ahern's cash payments cannot be recalled by one of the most cunning politicians in Europe? New Labour leader Eamon Gilmore certainly doesn't believe it and has again, albeit in a cynical gesture, reiterated his call on the Taoiseach to resign his office. He also said that political accountability could not await the publication of the tribunal report.

There are two ways of looking at or dealing with this situation. We can take a common-sense, principled approach and disbelieve the unbelievable statements given by Mr Ahern and demand his resignation. Or, we can take an 'I'm all right, Jack' approach and bury our heads in the sand hoping it'll go away, along with all those pesky "fact-obsessed" journalists seeking the truth.

The latter approach demands the men of Ireland also forget about politics and ring up Des Cahill on Sports Call on RTE Radio One and scream furiously for a fatwa on Irish rugby coach Eddie O'Sullivan. And it also endorses the recent Irish Times Women Today Poll which states that seven per cent of Irish women feel politics is not relevant, while a whopping 57 per cent rate skin/hair-care as very important.

Meanwhile, we can only assume the German Ambassador is pleasantly amused - in a schadenfreude kind of way - at where our priorities lie so far.