Ahern isn't a crook in the mould of Burke. Neither has he been a kept man, as Haughey was for decades.

But what is emerging, and his reluctance to come clean about it all, suggests that his behaviour fell far short of what is expected of senior politicians. And in so much of it, he appears to have acted as the ethical offspring of Haughey and Burke, his transgressions differing only in scale.

Take the current hullabaloo over his apparent benefactor, Micheal Wall. On 2 December, 1994, three days before Ahern expected to take office as Taoiseach, Wall walked into St Luke's with a briefcase stuffed with stg�30,000. The money, we are told, was for renovations, or stamp duty, or something to do with a house Wall was buying, but which Ahern was due to rent. Bertie put it in his safe and then gave it to his partner Celia Larkin, who deposited it in her account.

Reel back the years to December 1979, a few days after Haughey was elected Taoiseach. Developer Patrick Gallagher was summoned to Kinsealy to sort out Haughey's mounting debts. Gallagher agreed to channel �500,000 to the Taoiseach through a bogus land deal.

Then we have the house. All that is clear about the relationship between Ahern and Wall is that it was highly unorthodox. The 30 grand was unorthodox. Ahern offering to throw his own 50 in for further renovations, on a four-year old house which he was due to rent, was unorthodox. His explanation of where he got the �50,000 was barely credible, claiming that �28,000 of it had been saved in the previous 12 months, from a net salary of around �40,000.

The most unorthodox aspect of it all was Wall's willing the house to his tenant Ahern in the event of his death.

Lawyers for the Mahon tribunal found this arrangement so bizarre that they questioned whether Wall was merely Ahern's nominee as owner.

Ahern denied this.

Another man with another strange arrangement about his house was Ray Burke. For 30 years, there were rumours suggesting the property was given to him by developers. A few years ago, the planning tribunal found as a fact that Burke's sugar daddies, the crooked builders Joe Brennan and Tom McGowan, had in fact donated the house to Burke.

There are other echoes. The whipround was a favoured tactic of Des Traynor to raise cash for Haughey. In 1993 and 1994, whiprounds were organised for Ahern. The scale was much different, the practice all too similar.

The most unfortunate echo with Haughey's grabbing also came to light last week. One of the whipping boys was Padraic O'Connor of NCB stockbrokers. He now says he wasn't a friend of Ahern's and the NCB cheque for �5,000 that he donated was intended for the Taoiseach's constituency organisation, not his personal use. O'Connor sought a receipt for the money, which reinforces his version of events.

In 1989, developer Mark Kavanagh gave �100,000 to Haughey, intended for the party, which received only �25,000. He went looking for a receipt, which he never received, and eventually brought his concerns to Haughey's successor, Ahern.

Just as Haughey deflected attention from his money troubles using fear, so Ahern has done so through popularity won, and sympathy elicited.

The Taoiseach has done much in public life for which he should be commended. That he is neither a bully nor a thug, as his mentors were, stands to him now. But he should be obliged to answer questions and not hide behind a tribunal.

By his own account, his financial transactions have nothing to do with the substance of the tribunal's inquiry.

Why not just come out with his hands up and reveal the full truth? We are at the high water mark of the democratic process. Bypass the media and let the public decide.

Except this time, tell everything. No varnish, no waffle, no spin. Let's get a proper look at that man beaming down from every lamppost in the country.