Council cheques affair: Call for sworn inquiry

A call to the Minister for the Environment & Local Government to order a sworn inquiry into why cheques paid to Meath County Council by developers remained uncashed for a considerable period of time has been made by a councillor this week in the midst of a storm of controversy over the payments. Cllr Brian Fitzgerald, who made the call, said he was not suggesting wrongdoing on anyone's part but declared himself dissatisfied with explanations about the cheques given at a county council meeting on Monday. "The reply given to councillors raised more questions than it gave answers. I'm not accusing anyone of anything, I want to make that clear, but in the interests of full transparency, a sworn inquiry by a senior official of the Department is the only thing that will satisfy people," he said. The councillor claimed to have discovered what he termed "a major discrepancy" in the information given to the councillors about the cheques. Meath County Manager Tom Dowling denied there was any wrongdoing by the local authority and announced yesterday (Tuesday) afternoon that he had decided to establish "a full independent investigation to verify the handling of monies received by the planning department". Fine Gael Cllr Sirena Campbell had raised the issue at Monday's meeting of the council, asking if the manager or any officials were aware of any occasion or occasions in the past five years when payments by cheque for planning fees or service fees related to planning and made out to the council from persons or companies involved in planning applications, had remained uncashed for any considerable period of time. She said she had been contacted by a journalist who had claimed that cheques related to planning applications were being "put in a drawer". She said: "I am not seeking to impugn the reputation of the county manager or any officials, nor am I acting on a hunch." She was speaking after an official response to her question that confirmed that the council sometimes accepted post-dated cheques. When Cllr Campbell asked a supplementary question if the manager was aware of any council official or member of the council "benefiting from this facility", there was uproar in the chamber. Fianna Fail Cllr Shane Cassells, banging the desk in front of him with his fist, accused of her going on a "media spin" and of trying to suggest "the boys are on the take". Council chairman Cllr Bill Carey tried in vain to restore order as Cllrs Cassells and Campbell faced each other across the chamber, with their voices raised. The meeting was adjourned to allow tempers to cool and, when it resumed, the county manager said that "unfortunately", whether Ms Campbell had intended to or not, she had raised allegations "about an official benefiting or acting improperly. (This) is of great concern and I have to ask her to substantiate or withdraw her allegations". Cllr Campbell said she owed the council an apology if she made "any suggestion of impropriety, nor do I suggest such impropriety occurred", and she withdrew her comments. The seeds of this week's fiery debate lie in rumours circulating for some weeks that cheques paid to the council by developers and builders had been in the council's possession but remained uncashed. The Meath Chronicle raised the matter with a council spokesperson on 22nd September last when it asked the council about the reports circulating that the "council had taken in up to €2 million in cheques but that these cheques remained in an office in the council and that they went out of date". The council replied at that time: "With regard to the issue about cheques, the matter has been investigated and the council is satisfied that there is no substance to the reports." The council admitted this week that it had, in fact, kept cheques to the value of €1,040,301 on hand but for "specific reasons". It said that the acceptance of post-dated cheques was "an ongoing facility granted to applicants and it has proven to be a useful and pragmatic tool in the management of development contribution payments." The council said all cheques were receipted, batched and lodged with the council's treasurer within two working days. It said it could also agree to a schedule of payments for a development and "it would not be unusual for an agreement to recognise the convenience of phased payments, and in such circumstances, cheques may be lodged with the planning authority who will present them for payment in due course". Outlining the details, council planning official Michael Griffin said the cheques fell into three categories. Category one related to four developers where a developer had agreed to a payment schedule. The value of the cheques in this case was €993,125 and the balance outstanding on this at 5th October was €11,020. Category two related to cheques for €43,904 which were "referred to drawer" (bounced). This amount was still outstanding and developers involved had been contacted and the debt is being pursued, the council said. In a third category, one development involved "post-dated cheques" for €3,272. No amount was outstanding in this case. It is the third category that is being challenged by Cllr Fitzgerald. He has insisted these were not "post-dated cheques" as the council has claimed. He said he had been in touch with the person who paid the money and had seen evidence that that person had written eight cheques for the council between 20th-24th October last year. "On 26th June this year, he got a letter from the council asking him to issue fresh cheques and to send back the old ones to them. In other words, these were not post-dated cheques as stated by the council but cheques which had been retained by the council and not cashed," the councillor said.