3 4 CHAIRMAN: Good morning Mr. O'Neill. 5 - The Tribunal of ...

241 investors who would operate --2 A. Correct.3 Q. 118 -- to acquire it; isn't that right? And you explained to them, and in4 particular to Mr. Luke Mooney, with whom you were familiar from previous5 dealings, the manner in which you intended to set about achieving the rezoning;6 isn't that right?7 A. I'm sure I did.8 Q. 119 And having done so, CFI declined to become involved in the project; isn't that9 right?10 A. They did decline.11 Q. 120 Did they give you a reason as to why they were not prepared to stand in the12 position of financiers to this project, whereas they had done so for other13 projects, including your Mount Argus project earlier that year?14 A. I'm not sure if they outlined in detail the reasons. But I have a feeling15 that there was reference made that it would be controversial, high risk and it16 wasn't guaranteed.17 Q. 121 Yes. Mr. Mooney in furnishing his account of events to the Tribunal did so in18 a number of documents which were furnished to the Tribunal, one of which was a19 statement which was provided in November of 2004. At page 2665, of which at20 point 3 he states "That because of the business risk involved and a desire not21 to become involved in a potentially controversial planning event, we declined.22 Mr. Tiernan had told us that the application could be controversial and would23 involve heavy lobbying of councillors." Is that an accurate summation of what24 the situation was?25 A. Yes.26 Q. 122 I think independently of that statement of events as to why it was that CFI27 declined to involve themselves in this transaction, you are aware that they28 also offered an explanation to you or possibly not offered an explanation but29 certainly recited a history of events which led to their declining to become30 involved, when Mr. Mooney wrote to you on the 27th of May 1997 in the course ofPremier Captioning & Realtime Limitedwww.pcr.ie Day 564