IMAGINE if, in 1997, the state had begun building a road but now, nearly 13 years on, there is still no sign of the road being finished. Imagine if the project in that time had run up an estimated bill in excess of €100m, with three of those employed having being paid in excess of €24m, and that the person running the project had admitted that errors had been made. What do you think would happen?

There would be ructions in the Dáil. The government would be on the rack. The opposition parties would be screaming for heads. There would be calls for inquiries in to what was going on. Right?

So why is the 'road to nowhere', otherwise known as the Moriarty Tribunal, being so completely ignored by the political establishment?

Of course, a tribunal of inquiry investigating payments to politicians is a much more complex and tricky matter than building a road. It also has to be pointed out that at least part of the reason for the delay in the tribunal completing its work has been due to various legal challenges.

But the jaw-dropping revelations that have emerged about the operation of the tribunal in recent weeks have raised such serious question marks about its credibility, it is astonishing that it isn't dominating political debate.

Instead, we have heard nothing from the five main political parties on the matter. And with their silence, they have completely abrogated their responsibility to the citizens of this republic.

Political parties have tended to run a mile from any criticism of tribunals, aside from very general complaints about the legal gravy train involved. Since the success of McCracken in unearthing payments to Charlie Haughey and the halcyon days of Flood, when James Gogarty had the nation enraptured, the tribunals have been portrayed (not least in the media) as being on the side of angels. And no political party wanted to risk being perceived as being in the opposite camp, particularly those parties whose former politicians were under investigation.

It's the reason why numerous attempts to rein in the outrageous legal fees being paid down at Dublin Castle have failed.

But such moral cowardice on the part of the political system should no longer be tolerated.

There is no question that in their early days, the tribunals were a necessary and powerful force in cleaning up politics. But we are long past the point where the benefits exceeded the enormous costs. At a time when the state is having to cut social welfare rates and borrow in the order of €400-500m a week to pay the bills, tolerance for marathon and unwieldy tribunals that have created 22 millionaires from their legal teams should be long past breaking point.

And that is even more the case given what has emerged about the Moriarty tribunal in recent weeks. A couple of months ago, the tribunal was on the verge of publishing its final report. Everybody involved believes that report would have made very serious findings about the awarding of the second mobile phone licence in the mid-1990s. The impact on the reputation of the state and many of those involved in the licence process – including a significant number of civil servants – would have been very significant.

But everything has changed utterly. First there was game-changing new evidence from two officials at the attorney general's office, which the tribunal had strongly resisted hearing until, it is claimed, the threat of legal action.

And then last week came a hard-hitting statement from the Danish telecoms consultant who was a key adviser to the government for the competition for the licence and who is now willing to give evidence to the tribunal. That statement strongly criticised Judge Moriarty's preliminary findings and insisted that Esat Digifone was the clear winner of the licence competition which, the statement said, was free of political interference.

Based on these two developments, it seems inevitable that the tribunal is going to run into 2011 and that the final report is going to have to be extensively rewritten.

The obvious question to be asked is what would have happened if these developments had not become public and the final report had been published, as very nearly happened. Even leaving aside the potential fall-out for Ireland Inc in that scenario, it's a question that goes to the very heart of natural justice.

Yet it is a question that none of the political parties appear remotely interested in asking. There are numerous other questions begging to be asked about the modus operandi of the tribunal. How, for example, could Judge Moriarty have made a key statement two years ago based on a letter he said he had got from the Attorney General, when the Attorney General's office had subsequently written to him on at least seven occasions saying there was no such letter?

But nobody in political life appears to have the stomach to ask those questions. Howls of outrage and table thumping are a daily occurrence in the Dáil. But how can we believe this is not simply grandstanding and playing to the populist gallery, when politicians are choosing to look the other way in relation to such important developments at Dublin Castle?

scoleman@tribune.ie