Skip to main content
Normal View

COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS debate -
Thursday, 18 May 2017

Bord na gCon: Financial Statements 2015 (Resumed)

Mr. Phil Meaney(Chairman, Bord na gCon) and Dr. Seán Brady (Interim Chief Executive Officer, Bord na gCon) called and examined.

We return today to the 2015 financial statements of Bord na gCon. We are joined from Bord na gCon by Mr. Phil Meaney, chairman, Dr. Seán Brady, interim chief executive officer, Mr. Michael Murnane, chief financial officer, Mr. Colin Walsh, director of commercial operations, Mr. Pat Creed, board member, Mr. Pat Herbert, board member, and Mr. Joe Lewins, director of IT and tote. We are joined from the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine by Mr. Brendan Gleeson, assistant secretary.

I remind members, witnesses and those in the Public Gallery that all mobile phones must be either switched off or set in aeroplane mode. Silent mode is not sufficient to prevent signals from interfering with the recording of proceedings.

I advise the witnesses that, by virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the committee. If they are directed by it to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and they continue to do so, they are entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person, persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.

Members are reminded of the provisions of Standing Order 186 that the committee shall refrain from inquiring into the merits of a policy or policies of the Government or a Minister of the Government or the merits of the objectives of such policy. Members are also reminded of the long-standing ruling of the Chair to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I remind those in the Public Gallery that they are in the Houses by special permission and should not make any comments or distract from the proceedings in any way. If they do so, they will be asked to leave. None of the witnesses may be approached after the meeting, during the break or while they are in the Houses of the Oireachtas or the vicinity thereof. I insist on full co-operation on this matter. Following incidents two weeks ago, this matter is being taken very seriously by the Captain of the Guard and Superintendent of the House.

We will resume proceedings at the point at which we concluded the previous meeting. Deputy Catherine Murphy was questioning the witnesses when the meeting adjourned. When the Deputy has concluded her contribution, members will be taken in the following sequence: Deputy Shane Cassells, Deputy Catherine Connolly and Deputy Alan Kelly, after which we will have a second round of contributions commencing with Deputy Cullinane followed by Deputy Marc MacSharry. Deputy Bobby Aylward has also indicated. I am confining each member's contribution to ten minutes as it is intended to complete proceedings before the voting bloc commences in the Chamber.

That will not be possible

If it is not possible, the meeting will have to suspend for more than an hour. I understand there will be six or seven divisions, which will mean suspending until well after 2 p.m. if our deliberations are not concluded when the voting bloc commences. I will advise later as to when or if we expect to resume proceedings in the afternoon. I invite Deputy Catherine Murphy to resume her questioning of the witnesses.

I was establishing the composition of Bord na gCon's debt when proceedings were interrupted to allow a vote to take place last week. There is a debt arising in Limerick greyhound stadium and another debt carried on overdraft which was related to the site. Is the overdraft facility still in place or is the overdraft now a loan?

Mr. Michael Murnane

There are three separate aspects to the bank debt of the Irish Greyhound Board, IGB. There is a €12.5 million loan for the Limerick stadium, which was drawn in December 2009. There has always been an overdraft of €12.5 million that has been effectively closely drawn to the limit of each year for the past long number of years. In 2015, AIB required those facilities to be renewed and split the overdraft into what is considered a hard core because it has never fallen below that level. It insisted that IGB take out a term loan of €6 million on that and we still have an overdraft facility of €6.5 million. That overdraft level varies as the year passes.

I presume the Limerick loan was the hard core one.

Mr. Michael Murnane

No, the Limerick one is a €12.5 million fixed loan. That is interest only and has never changed.

We were told at the previous meeting that if Bord na gCon did not sell the Harold's Cross track, it would be forced to do so. The Department of Education and Skills has since made an offer for the site which is going through a process. We found out since the last meeting that the site is valued at approximately €23 million, which is close to the figure for Bord na gCon's current liability of €24.77 million.

Mr. Michael Murnane

No, our liability at the end of 2015 was €21.3 million gross. What the Deputy is referring to is our facility. We can borrow up to that limit.

In that case, the valuation exceeds the liability. In terms of the pension deficit of approximately €8 million, where is that factored in?

Mr. Michael Murnane

The pension deficit stood at closer to €5 million at the end of 2016 following a section 50 process.

That pension liability is an estimation of future pension liabilities that will arise. There are 133 members of that scheme. It is a contingent liability that rests on the balance sheet and is disclosed as such in the accounts of the Irish Greyhound Board, IGB. It is being addressed with a section 50 policy and we also have a funding proposal in place in which it is planned to address that deficit by the end of 2023.

Has Bord na gCon ceased the defined benefit arrangement?

Mr. Michael Murnane

The benefit has been closed to new members since 2003.

To go back to the Department of Education and Skills, it appeared the Department looked at the site in advance of it becoming known that it could be subject to sale. Did Bord na gCon have other people look at it or did the Department of Education and Skills make contact? How did that happen? Who made contact? How did the Department know about it?

Dr. Seán Brady

The board of Bord na gCon made a decision on 23 March that the site would be sold. I then notified the Department of Agriculture, Food and Marine of the board's decision.

Was that 23 March 2017?

Dr. Seán Brady

It was 2017. I then notified the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. The Department drew my attention to the circular from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. It requested me to allow the Department of Education and Skills to take a look at the site. I was informed by that Department that it would do a valuation of the property. We facilitated that. We allowed it to examine the site. It visited the site on one occasion with the chief financial officer, Mr. Murnane, and me. Eventually, they made an offer for the property on 2 May.

According to a letter the committee has received from the Department of Education and Skills, the site had previously been assessed in early 2016 by the Department's professional and technical staff. It was considered suitable for a school development. That was in early 2016. Was the Department the only group to visit the site or what was the context of its visit in 2016?

Dr. Seán Brady

I am sorry, I started in January of this year so I cannot answer for 2016.

Is there anybody else here who could answer?

Mr. Michael Murnane

I can answer that question. The Department of Education and Skills was the only party that walked the site in 2016. The site was not up for sale or anything of the sort. During that timeframe, Bord na gCon was exploring the option of getting the stadium rezoned for alternative uses. The Department approached us and asked if its representatives could look at the site and walk through the stadium. I think they did that on Monday. I was there the morning on which they were there.

Can Mr. Murnane recall how that came about?

Mr. Michael Murnane

It was through a phone call. I received a phone call saying that if I was in Dublin, the Department of Education and Skills was coming in. I forget the name of the lady from the Department. I was asked to introduce the party to the site. That was about it. They just walked around. I believe two people from the Department walked around the site.

We know what transpired subsequently. It was valued and a transaction is under way with an offer of €23 million. That figure pretty much covers Bord na gCon's debt, including its Limerick loan. Is that the case?

Dr. Seán Brady

This transaction is passing through a process. An offer has been received. The Department of Education and Skills is the preferred buyer of the property but there are a number of steps to be taken before the sale is concluded.

We have been made aware of that. Moving on to Shelbourne Park and Harold's Cross, Dr. Brady said there were two stadia in close proximity and that it does not make sense as they are not fully operational. One operates two days and the other three days. How often do other stadia around the country open?

Mr. Michael Murnane

The stadium in Cork opens three nights and the majority of other stadia throughout the country open two nights, from March onwards specifically.

Therefore, it is quite typical for facilities not to be fully deployed over the full week.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Quite a number of stadia would concentrate on that shoulder between Thursday and the weekend nights.

With regard to the current situation with Shelbourne Park, because of this dispute with owners and breeders, the stadium is not in use. Is there a resolution for that dispute? Will the sale of Harold's Cross be an impediment to that?

Dr. Seán Brady

The stadium remains open each night. There is no live dog racing. Customers of Bord na gCon come and watch racing from other stadia. The crowds are small, but since that dispute occurred, we have been looking at any way or means of mediating and getting a solution to the impasse. We hope to achieve that as soon as possible.

Would Shelbourne Park be regarded as the flagship stadium?

Dr. Seán Brady

Absolutely. It is our Croke Park or Aviva stadium.

What is Dr. Brady's assessment of the impact beyond Shelbourne Park itself as a result of the way it is currently functioning?

Dr. Seán Brady

It has a very serious impact on the business because Shelbourne Park is the heartbeat of the organisation.

Has Dr. Brady quantified the impact?

Dr. Seán Brady

The impact of the current impasse is costing the business €30,000 a week.

I just have a couple of other questions. I think I will leave them.

The Deputy is free to come back in later on.

I welcome the gentlemen from Bord na gCon. I wish to start by reflecting on some of the evidence which we heard at the last meeting and comments from Dr. Brady in respect of the importance he placed on vacant possession in the matter of the disposal of the stadium at Harold's Cross. Obviously, that was a motivating factor when it came to the manner in which he moved in the Valentine's swoop. I wish to examine a number of areas in this respect. On the manner in which it was conducted, given the importance that Dr. Brady has placed on vacant possession from the point of view of the banks and disposal, was there any part of the IGB's debt written off by the banks as a sweetener to ensure it would get vacant possession of the stadium at Harold's Cross? Was Dr. Brady motivated to act in the heavy-handed manner in which he did? He admitted here the previous day that he was wrong to do so and that he would revisit the decision if he could. It is obviously causing a lot of agony. It is also the central motivating point in respect of this dispute. If there was a write-off, is that now in jeopardy because of the stand-off? As has been confirmed in the letter from the Secretary General of the Department of Education and Skills, no moneys have passed into the accounts of the IGB at this point. Obviously then, no money has been passed on to the banks in respect of paying the debt. Will Dr. Brady begin on that point please?

Dr. Seán Brady

I will take the first part of the question. Perhaps our director, Mr. Pat Creed, will take the second part. Certainly, I am an outsider with 30 years of management experience. On my eighth day in the job I went to the head office of AIB and met the people from AIB. On the way out of that meeting, they informed me that if the IGB did not sell the site, the bank would.

That informed our approach, or at least my approach, given the level of debt. The organisation was skin and bones thanks to that straitjacket of debt. That informed my decision on the eighth day of my working for the organisation. Mr. Creed will deal with the second part of the Deputy's question.

No, I asked Dr. Brady directly. He mentioned the importance of vacant possession at the previous meeting.

Dr. Seán Brady

Yes.

I asked Dr. Brady about the manner in which the deal was done in terms of vacant possession and whether there was any financial incentive, for example, a write-off on part of the debt, to ensure that the IGB would get vacant possession for the bank, such was the importance that he placed on that aspect at the previous meeting. He wanted a clean deal.

Dr. Seán Brady

From my knowledge of property, the value of property is significantly different when it is unoccupied. In a vacant possession situation, one can get a better price for it.

Was there any sweetener from the bank to the effect that it would write off part of the debt if the IGB provided it with vacant possession?

Dr. Seán Brady

No.

If not a write-off, then any kind of financial deal.

Dr. Seán Brady

Nothing was offered to me.

I did not mean Dr. Brady personally. There is a board. I asked a specific question. I did not say, "Offered to you, Dr. Seán Brady". I asked whether a write-off on part of the debt or any other kind of financial incentive had been offered to the IGB.

Dr. Seán Brady

No.

Dr. Seán Brady

No.

Does Dr. Brady wish to clarify that with Mr. Creed or anyone else?

Mr. Pat Creed

The discussions with the bank are ongoing. The sale has come in the middle of those. There are many discussions going on with the bank but I would not link any discussion on a write-down with the closure of Harold's Cross.

So there are ongoing discussions about managing the debt and a potential write-down of same.

Mr. Pat Creed

As I said at the previous meeting, we missed a trigger event in December, which means that our facilities have been on-demand since then. The situation has changed dramatically with the sale of Harold's Cross. There are ongoing discussions with the bank.

By virtue of the fact that there was a sale and the bank can see money coming in as a lump sum, there is the potential for a write-off on part of the debt.

Mr. Pat Creed

I am not saying that because the discussions are ongoing and we have not got to that level. The Deputy needs to remember that we are a semi-State commercial body with the implications of a semi-State commercial body.

Chairman, I am not sure that I have got a straight answer from either witness. Either there was a scenario in which an offer of a write-off on the debt was placed on the table based on the fact that the IGB would get a lump sum for the facility or there was not.

Mr. Pat Creed

There are ongoing discussions. For me to say that there was an offer would be to speak on behalf of the bank, but I am not in a position to do that.

Might I help the Deputy?

The Chairman is not on the board of the IGB, so he cannot. I am asking those who are on the board. I got----

I was going to help the Deputy with his question, not the answer.

-----a play on words. When I asked Dr. Brady whether anything had been offered, he said, "Nothing was offered to me." People can draw conclusions in that respect.

Dr. Seán Brady

I am prepared to clarify - nothing was offered to IGB to my knowledge.

That is fine, but hang on one second - do not take that tone with me. It is important that questions be answered today. Let me remind the witnesses of something, given the seriousness of what is involved. People are watching these proceedings who are concerned for their sport. Many of them listened to "Drivetime" on RTE Radio 1 on Tuesday and would have been shocked by the fact that this sport received €300,000 per week in taxpayers' money. Mothers who cannot get occupational therapists for their kids because of a lack of resources, elderly people who cannot get medical cards and people who are under financial pressure are watching a sport for dogs that have less meat on their bones than I do, yet the witnesses are talking about the payment of such sums. These are serious issues and significant payments into the sport, so I would appreciate answers.

Regarding the €23 million - we could not get that figure the previous day, but thank God for the Department of Education and Skills, which can give us a three-page report - secured from the sale of Harold's Cross to the Department, we have clarified that the land has been zoned as Z9 - open space. No local area plan, LAP, was prepared in advance, but Mr. Murnane's comments were interesting, in that departmental officials walked the site in 2016 and alternative uses for it were explored. Do the witnesses believe that a proper price was paid for this land? We have just completed an investigation into Project Eagle and whether there had been losses on land. I wonder whether the Comptroller and Auditor will have to audit "Project Greyhound" and whether too much has been paid for this land, given that it was zoned as open space. The amount magically hit the debt figure incurred by the IGB and the Department of Education and Skills suddenly paid a composite amount for the purchase of the property. Does Mr. Gleeson believe that this was the correct amount of money? There is no guarantee that the land will be rezoned or that there will be planning permission, yet €23 million has been paid for the site.

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

I do not know what an appropriate valuation for the site is because I am not a valuer and have no expertise in that regard but a process has been established under circulars promulgated by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. The process is that the Valuation Office provides a valuation for the site. I cannot say more about the valuation than that. The Valuation Office valued it. That is all that I know about it.

There was a second aspect to the Deputy's question. A zoning process is under way. As I understand it, that process will involve getting sanction from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. It will also involve the provision of a contract that will be subject to zoning, in that the Department of Education and Skills will sign a contract subject to the appropriate zoning being obtained. That is my understanding.

Maybe the question would be better posed to the Department of Education and Skills when it is before us.

Let us discuss the circular. At our previous meeting, Dr. Brady and Mr. Gleeson referred to circular 17/2016, the process since 23 March and the interaction between the Departments on the purchase of the site. Would it be fair to say that the board had at the very least been hamstrung by that circular? Despite the offer from the Department of Education and Skills, was there any examination by the board? Mr. Murnane has indicated that alternatives were explored in 2016. To what depth? Given that Dublin City Council was entering into a new city plan at the time, the IGB could have approached the council and sought an LAP for the site. That is now being done retrospectively. The IGB could have applied for commercial zoning and, in doing so, possibly realised a greater value and more funds for the sport. What alternative uses were explored in 2016?

Mr. Michael Murnane

In 2016, Bord na gCon underwent a zoning application process with Dublin City Council. That did not succeed. It was ruled out close to the end of 2016, although I cannot be certain of the dates. That is where Bord na gCon found itself.

What was the nature of the application?

Mr. Michael Murnane

We sought zoning for alternative uses. The council supported a Z1 - housing, or whatever the term is - application and encouraged us to opt for that.

Let me clarify. The planning officials were supporting an application in the pre-planning phase.

Mr. Michael Murnane

The planning officials-----

It is normally called a strategic issues paper in the pre-development plan stage. Mr. Murnane is telling me that, at the strategic issues paper stage, council officials were supporting residential development on that site.

Mr. Michael Murnane

It was residential development at the end, but it came through the process from Z12 to Z1. My terms might not be the best, but-----

Did the board make a formal application to the planners at that point?

Mr. Michael Murnane

We made an application for Z12 for alternative uses for the site to the planners at what I believe was the end of 2015 or start of 2016.

As part of the city plan review.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Yes.

Mr. Murnane is telling me that it was rejected.

Mr. Michael Murnane

By council members.

Did the IGB explore any other alternative use for the site or seek-----

Mr. Michael Murnane

Not at that stage. The decision was only made at the end of 2016. Bord na gCon held an open meeting in the Harold's Cross stadium at which we met all local representative groups including greyhound people, non-greyhound people and people who expressed strong support for a school in the general area.

At that open meeting we were trying to give the details of our plans in an open manner, but in my opinion it was very obvious that the housing application would not proceed.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Obviously one has to wait for the decision on the planning process from the council.

Did the council members give an indication on an alternative use of the stadium? I am trying to get a sense of the process. Mr. Murnane has cited the FAI and GAA, as bodies with stadia to which Bord na gCon aspires. The FAI has recently concluded a deal on the north side, where Tolka Park FC has merged with Dalymount Park. Equally, this was challenging for the football clubs but by working with Dublin City Council the merger has been managed quite successfully.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Yes.

What was the actual level of debt? One option had been ruled out but was it possible to explore other possibilities?

Mr. Michael Murnane

As Mr. Pat Creed advised the trigger event was there with the 9 December and at that stage it was decided to put the property up for sale to see what it would realise.

The interest of the Department of Education and Skills was a real bailout, given what was happening.

In terms of the marketing strategy that was circulated to committee members, and Mr. Murnane has spoken about other stadia in regional towns when responding to Deputy Murphy, is it proposed to sell the tracks in Mullingar or other regional towns? Does Bord na gCon propose to become a niche market? Will it lose its footprint in rural regional areas? The track in my home town of Navan closed 20 years ago and Lidl has built on it now. By selling off the dog tracks, I know the sport lost a footprint in a regional town and lost the local patronage. If Bord na gCon takes a decision to go for regionalisation it will narrow its footprint. Bord na gCon admits in its marketing strategy that stadia once seen as a key hub have become less connected to the community. If the board continues with the strategy of narrowing the market rather than expanding is it not on a slippery downward spiral? The GAA succeeds as an organisation because it is in every single parish in the country.

After Mr. Meaney responds, I will call Deputy Connolly.

I have one more question. If I had spoken on the last occasion, I could have had all day to make my points.

We are giving each member a ten minute slot and then there will be a second slot.

Mr. Phil Meaney

This board has no plans and sees no necessity to close further tracks. We realise the importance of the existing footprint. We realise there are pools of dogs in the areas where tracks exist. I remember the time when the track in Navan closed down. It was closed for commercial reasons. It was a very different time.

We have no plans to close down any further tracks at this stage and we do not see any need to do it.

In terms of resolving this dispute, there was a comment made at the previous meeting and again today on an aspiration. What has happened in terms of addressing that aspiration? I have had several calls and people calling to my constituency office in Athboy. People from Delvin, Crookedwood, Oldcastle and Navan call into my office asking about the future of their sport.

Mr. Phil Meaney

The chief executive, myself, the board and the executive have put in a huge effort to get racing back in Dublin. I believe we are getting closer to that but I cannot say when it will happen. We have put in long hours. The CEO stated earlier that the IGB is losing €30,000, that is not counting the amount of money the dog owners are losing in that period. It is very obvious that we need to get racing back in Dublin.

On the last occasion when Bord na gCon came before the committee I was overwhelmed by the gender equality. The thought occurred to me that if the board was more balanced, the industry might be in less difficulty. I say that tongue in check and semi seriously.

My first question is whether any members of the board has a conflict of interest in any way?

Mr. Phil Meaney

No.

On the previous occasion, I think the chairman said that the legislation pre-empted the members of the board from owning dogs?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes, I think I may have suggested that, but legislation does not prevent board members from owning dogs. To clarify my own position, I do not own a dog and I have not owned dogs for a number of years. My family and another family have a syndicate. I do not own dogs.

Let me put my questions in context because I am not here to highlight stuff that is personal. My role is to ensure there is value for money. Obviously Bord na gCon is in trouble because of various problems in the past including a previous board that invested unwisely at a particular time but in addition there are serious issues in respect of governance and lack of integrity have been highlighted. I will come to those reports.

I will start with the Dalton report and then the Morris report, and a presentation to the Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine. What was the name of the accountants? Is it Mazars?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Mazars are our internal auditors, but Indecon did an internal report.

Numerous reports have highlighted governance issues, and there were serious issues in respect of animal welfare and the monitoring of illegal substances and so on. In that context have any members of the board got a conflict of interest?

Mr. Phil Meaney

No.

When Mr. Meaney inadvertently told the Committee of Public Accounts that members of the board were not allowed to own greyhounds on the last occasion, that was incorrect?

Mr. Phil Meaney

We are allowed to own greyhounds.

What was said on the last occasion, which I found amusing, given the lack of gender representation was that none of the board members had dogs but there were dogs in the names of their wives.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes, absolutely, I said that inadvertently.

Mr. Phil Meaney

No. I have no dogs in my wife's name or as far as I understand, none of the board members has. I was not leading anybody astray.

Mr. Meaney said it.

Mr. Phil Meaney

I did say it, but I am making it very clear there are no conflicts of interests. We do not own greyhounds. It is very easy to check that with the ICC database.

I wish to use my time more efficiently. I only want to clarify the matter.

Mr. Pat Creed

My wife has greyhounds. What she does in her own business is her own business. I do not tell her what to do. She has greyhounds in her name.

It is great to hear in the 21st century that she is independent. That is reassuring. I am simply going back on what was said on the last occasion. What happened to gender representation on the board of Bord na gCon? Indecon recommended that the members of the board serve so many terms. I know that the board members have said repeatedly that politicians have failed to bring in the appropriate legislation. Could Bord na gCon not have taken the best of the recommendations, which they did in respect of other recommendations and why did they not implement the recommendation that the board be limited to three years?

Mr. Phil Meaney

We have a lady on the board. It is unfortunately that through business commitments, she is out of the country today.

And she was not present on the previous occasions.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes, she was out of the country at that time.

I did not see her name, I must have missed it.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Ms Riona Heffernan.

There are seven on the board.

Mr. Phil Meaney

There are six board members and the chairman.

Why has the board not taken on the recommendation that the time period should be limited for the board?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Indecon recommended that board members and the chairman serve a maximum of two five year periods, but that legislation is not on the Statute Book.

Forget the legislation, why is the board not taking the recommendation on board? Have they taken the recommendation on board?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Unfortunately, we do not appoint the board. The board members went through the Public Appointments Service, PAS, process and the Minister appoints the board.

I do not think it is appointed through the PAS. Let us get that clear as well. Is it that the Minister nominates people on to the board and the Taoiseach nominates the chairperson?

I think Mr. Gleeson from the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine will clarify that.

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

Deputy, this is a question for the Department, not for the board. The board does not appoint its own members. The Minister appoints the board members.

Are they appointed without an interview?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

A system has been in place for the past several years.

Will Mr. Gleeson clarify the system?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

The Minister advertises for the particular desirable skills, for example, veterinary, financial, legal would have been some of the skills that were required in recent years. People apply through the Public Appointments Service, PAS.

There is a board in the PAS, which includes independent members, that shortlists applicants based on their CV. The shortlist is prepared for the Minister and may consist of seven or ten people. The Minister makes his or her selection from the shortlist. That is the system as it exists today.

For how long has that system existed?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

The last four board appointees have been through that system - sorry, the last three.

Over what period of time?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

The last four years.

Is there an interview process along with that?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

There can be, but there has not been.

There can be. One of the notable aspects was the lack of skills on the board of Bord na gCon. An independent commentator has said that one of the most obvious things was the lack of skills. If the organisation was advertising and looking for particular skills then how did this happen?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

We have responded to that. When we advertise for these posts we look for particular kinds of skills. The people appointed to the board in the last number of years have included a senior veterinarian who was the head of the EU's food and veterinary office. He was also, at one time, the chief veterinary officer in the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. He is also a lawyer. We have appointed someone with legal expertise who is the State Solicitor in Cork City. We have also appointed a financial expert, Mr. Creed, who is the chief executive officer of Bank of Ireland Finance. These are the kinds of skills we advertised for and these were the appointees.

They were not there before that, obviously.

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

No.

We are told that is history.

Dr. Seán Brady

Can I add one small point to the Chairman's comments? On the executive team we have one lady who is our director of racing governance and compliance.

Let me go to problems with regulations. Presumably the witnesses have read the reports.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes.

What recommendations have not been implemented? In January 2016 the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine made a number of recommendations. Have they all been implemented?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes. They have been responded to.

No. Have all the 12 recommendations been implemented?

Dr. Seán Brady

In my opinion 12 of them have been implemented. There is at the beginning one recommendation, which perhaps falls under the remit of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. I am not sure if the Department would agree with that, it is for the update of the Power report.

The first recommendation by the committee was the compilation of an up-to-date economic assessment of the industry, including a full breakdown of staff and so on, in order to accurately reflect the current state of the industry. Was that done?

Dr. Seán Brady

Not by IGB.

So that was not done. That is a serious recommendation. Of the 13 recommendations, the first one has not been implemented. What else has not been implemented?

Mr. Phil Meaney

I cannot exactly say off the top of my head. It is my understanding that we responded to and have implemented-----

I cannot accept this and I will tell Mr. Meaney why. It is because I have so many reports before me. The problem was that the recommendations were not implemented. Had the Dalton report been implemented and acted upon in 2006, or any of the reports been acted on, we would not be in serious trouble. I am specifically asking the witnesses about this but I get an answer that they have been implemented except one. I go back to the first recommendation and I ask about it and I am told it has not yet been implemented.

We have 11 recommendations. The first one is very important, but all of them are very important. I will now turn to recommendation 11, which I thought was a misprint, where it states, "The Committee recommends that the ongoing issues concerning the breeding of greyhounds with dogs deceased for two years or more, registered in the stud book by the ICC, must be addressed immediately". Has that been addressed? I now know what it means because I made inquiries; the semen from a dead dog is kept for two years and its use is allowed for the two year period for the purposes of breeding in four studs throughout the country.

Mr. Phil Meaney

If I could-----

Please, my time is limited. Has that recommendation been implemented?

Mr. Phil Meaney

That is a very complicated question.

Mr. Phil Meaney

I will take the Deputy through it as best I can.

Subject to the Chairman, and to be fair to the witness, I have only so much time. That was a recommendation and even I, who had no knowledge of this, now realises what it means. Was it implemented? I understand that it was not. I want to be fair to Bord na gCon. I understand the witnesses have a legal letter relating to a certain dog winning a race.

Mr. Frank Nyhan

Chairman, on that-----

Let me finish please. I understand the recommendation is not being complied with and I understand the witnesses have received a letter from a solicitor in regard to a certain dog. That is just one example. I do not want to detour because of time constraints but I want an answer. Has it been complied with?

Mr. Frank Nyhan

The Deputy is correct in that it has not been complied with.

Mr. Frank Nyhan

Just so the Deputy understands, we do not control the stud book. That is done by the Irish Coursing Club.

I understand that.

Mr. Frank Nyhan

Primary legislation will be required to address that issue. We are before the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine on 30 May and it will be one of the issues raised.

I have seen that. I have seen the draft legislation. I have seen the proposal to remove this measure. The existing legislation obliges Bord na gCon to comply with that two year rule and it has not complied. Bord na gCon is allowing dogs to race illegally. Is this correct? These are dogs that have been bred using the semen that has been held for over the two year limit. They are taking part in races illegally. Is this correct?

Mr. Frank Nyhan

As I understand it there was a decision made in 2008 that required legislation and that legislation has not been passed, the decision being to not impose the two year sanction-----

I do not think that is the position.

Mr. Frank Nyhan

I think it is.

No, we will not be able to consider that now. I am asking the questions in regard to it. Bord na gCon was obliged, under existing legislation or regulations and it is still obliged. New legislation came in from a certain day forward but it was not retrospective.

Mr. Frank Nyhan

That is correct.

Okay. For those dogs caught prior to this new legislation - I believe it was November 2014 - is it the case that Bord na gCon is not complying with that?

Mr. Frank Nyhan

That is correct.

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

Perhaps the Deputy has answered the query. There was a new regulation introduced. The decision to introduce the rule was made in 2005. The board made the decision to revoke it in 2008 on the basis of practicality, but it did not. In 2014 the rule was revoked but it could not be made retrospective. We now have a provision in the Bill, currently with the committee, to deal with the issue.

Mr. Gleeson is now helping the evasion and the obfuscation. It is a simple question. Up to 2014 Bord na gCon was obliged and was not complying and the two directors have confirmed this. I will leave the implications of this to the people who were affected by it. I am sorry if I am doing something wrong-----

The Deputy has accused the witnesses of evasion.

I apologise to Mr. Gleeson if I have said something wrong. Sorry.

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

I just want to be clear that all I offered to do was explain the situation as it is. I explained the regulatory framework. Clearly there were dogs running between the time of the introduction of the rule and 2014, which did not comply with it and I accept that. I was not trying to suggest otherwise.

I apologise to Mr. Gleeson but I am conscious of time and the Chairman has said 15 minutes. It was said by two people already. The point I am trying to get at is the existing law is not being complied with. I leave that for the directors to face and the people who are affected by it. I am going to move on now to the-----

That was the last topic Deputy.

I was only starting.

I know, but the Deputy will get a second opportunity.

We should have a little bit of leeway because on the last occasion there was enormous leeway, so just a little bit-----

I do not think that would be fair any more than-----

I do not believe there should have been leeway but there is a big difference between half an hour and ten or 15 minutes. The question in regard to-----

Mr. Phil Meaney

I would like to make one further point. When dogs were registered, we do not have the registration of dogs. We got counsel advice that dogs that were registered had a legitimate expectation of being able to run. This is why I said earlier that it was complicated and maybe we need more time to go through this.

One moment, I asked the witness was it being complied with and he said no. I asked if Bord na gCon had received a letter from a solicitor in regard this matter, and it has.

Let me move on to another recommendation. Once again it comes back to confidence and integrity. This is why it is a mess and why there is a picket on Shelbourne Park stadium. Would the witnesses agree that there are huge problems with trust in this regard? I understand that there has been a vote of no confidence in the board by the breeders and owners.

Mr. Phil Meaney

If I could-----

I will let Mr. Meaney answer. My question is whether Mr. Meaney agrees that there is a breach of confidence and lack of trust. Does Mr. Meaney accept that?

Mr. Phil Meaney

I accept it and I made the point the last day that, as a board, we were in an impossible position. I have explained that at length.

Mr. Phil Meaney

If I am asked a question, Chairman, I need some opportunity to answer it.

Mr. Phil Meaney

We were in an impossible position. We had tough decisions to make. We made them. Tough decisions are tough decisions. One decides and one divides. When we make tough decisions, of course there are people who are not happy and of course there will be votes of no confidence. However, we have to manage the business in a way that is best for the industry.

Chairman, I would like if you would give me a little time. I am not interfering with the ability of Mr. Meaney or his powers to make decisions. I am simply saying that when reflecting on what is happening, it seems there is a lack of confidence. There is a big division between the board and those on the ground. Does Mr. Meaney accept that? I am not asking him to accept responsibility for it.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Again, I accept that opinion is held by some people. Deputy Connolly is making the point that this is the opinion held by all dog people. That is far from the truth.

That is fine. I accept-----

Mr. Phil Meaney

It is the opinion of a certain percentage.

Mr. Meaney does not accept it and that is fine. He can disagree with me.

My next question is about the consultative forum. One of the strong recommendations was that a consultative forum should be set up. Was that set up?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes.

Will Mr. Meaney tell me a little about it? On the last occasion I did not hear about it. The idea was that all stakeholders would be involved. Is that correct?

Mr. Phil Meaney

In December 2016 we invited people. It is a splintered industry and it always has been. In December 2015 we individually brought in all the stakeholders. During 2016 we brought together the stakeholders on two or three occasions – I am unsure of the exact number.

Not all stakeholders accepted our invitation, but we invited all stakeholders in. The board and the industry absolutely believe that a stakeholders forum is a good way of bringing the industry forward.

I have one or two questions left. I am going to ask about one of the strong recommendations. Can the deputation come back with material? Are there minutes of those meetings? There was a strong recommendation that formal meetings be held with all stakeholders. Can we get minutes of those? I will move on to the two last questions.

Mr. Colin Walsh

I can clarify the point for Deputy Connolly. The first meeting of the national greyhound forum was hosted on 15 March 2016. There were representatives from a cross-section of groups. I have before me a list of the groups, including various people from throughout the industry. There are details of the matters discussed and there are minutes.

The second meeting of the national greyhound forum took place on 14 July 2016. Again, there were representatives from a cross-section of groups. The details can all be furnished separately rather than going through the whole list.

The third meeting of the national greyhound forum took place on 10 November 2016. It was attended by the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Andrew Doyle and an official, Rebecca Chapman, who is responsible for the horse and greyhound racing division, and Teagasc. An overview of proposed legislation was discussed at the forum. Representatives attended from a broad cross-section of the industry.

These are structured meetings that are agenda-based. Minutes are taken. Different people have different views on them. Some people choose to attend. Some choose not to attend. A structure is in place. There is a commitment that the next forum will take place one month after the re-opening of Shelbourne Park.

I am going to come back to that with my second question, which relates to the strategic and business plans. Indecon did not state that Harold's Cross should be sold. Is that not right? It made a recommendation that Bord na gCon would look at selling a number of assets. The word "consider" was used. The recommendation was that Bord na gCon would consider looking at a number of assets, including land in Cork, Harold's Cross and other assets. Is that not right?

Mr. Phil Meaney

That is correct.

The report recommended that Bord na gCon should undertake an annual review to look at each individual racing track, determine which was good and bad and make decisions. The only three tracks making money were Cork, Shelbourne and Harold's Cross. Bord na gCon has come back and said that Harold's Cross and Shelbourne Park are not viable because they are so near each other. Both were making money. Those three tracks stood out.

What assessment has Bord na gCon done? Let us consider the track in Galway? What assessment has the board done in respect of the loss there? What plans does Bord na gCon have? Mr. Meaney should clarify the position in respect of the company running each race track. Is a separate company in place for the purposes of operating it? Do these companies have any other decision-making powers?

Dr. Seán Brady

I will take the question on strategic planning. I would also like to apologise to Deputy Aylward, because he asked a question that completely threw us the last day. I am unsure whether you were here at the time, Chairman. He asked about 2003 and 2017. We were thrown by that. In fact, there was an error on the recommendation, in my opinion, anyway. It was for 2013.

A strategic plan was prepared in 2013. It was followed by the Indecon report. Then, in 2015 a detailed plan was submitted to the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine in May 2015. We are following that plan. As a point of interest, the sale of Harold's Cross was one of the items in that strategic plan.

I understood that on the last occasion Dr. Brady said the strategic plan had come to an end and that there was no plan in place.

Dr. Seán Brady

No, there is a plan in place.

Is there a strategic plan in place?

Dr. Seán Brady

Yes.

Can we have a copy of it?

Dr. Seán Brady

Yes.

What date is on that strategic plan? What is the time period?

Dr. Seán Brady

It was produced on 29 May 2015. It runs to the end of 2017.

Mr. Brady's colleague, Mr. Meaney, has just said that it was for 2012. Which is it?

Mr. Phil Meaney

A strategic plan was prepared for the Department and it was to run from 2012 to 2017. A further updating of that plan took place, which Dr. Brady has referred to.

There is one strategic plan. It is running out this year.

Dr. Seán Brady

At the end of the year.

That plan featured in the Indecon report. Is that correct?

Dr. Seán Brady

That plan was subsequent to the Indecon report.

Dr. Seán Brady

The Indecon report was in 2014.

That is correct. The plan ran from 2012 to 2017.

Mr. Michael Murnane

The strategic plan is from 2013 to 2017. That was published in October 2013. The date is on the front of the report. Indecon happened subsequent to that - I think it happened in the first six months of 2014. It substantially updated the plan. It supported many of the thought processes in the plan but it significantly updated the metrics. Indecon recommended that we should follow the new income streams but reduce the reliance on those new income streams. That was heavily placed on the strategic plan.

I have not even got to that, and I will not get to it.

Mr. Michael Murnane

I am sorry.

My questions are all simple. They relate to the strategic plan and the year. I have got three different answers.

Mr. Michael Murnane

The strategic plan was from 2012 to 2017.

Very good. That featured in the Indecon report.

Mr. Michael Murnane

That is correct.

That is not what Mr. Murnane said.

Mr. Michael Murnane

I am sorry.

It features in the Indecon report. The Indecon report goes through it meticulously. It says that the Bord na gCon targets were not met. The report pointed out serious concerns for what Bord na gCon could expect in 2013. For example, the first year of the strategic plan ended with a total group surplus of €40,000, compared with the planned figure of €238,000. The report states that the most significant aspect of the 2013 performance was the non-achievement of the target for net turnover from the racing facilities. It also states that the plan appears to be approximately one year behind and so on. Why am I raising that? It is because there were concerns over the strategic plan. Indecon hoped that Bord na gCon would meet its targets further out or later on in the period. Did the board meet them? We do not know. The Bord na gCon representatives are not even sure of the years of the strategic plan. I am simply quoting from what the taxpayers have paid for.

The aim was to restore confidence. I realise the value of the greyhound industry. Serious issues around welfare arise that I might come back to. Anyway, the purpose is to restore confidence and integrity. Then, Bord na gCon goes on to sell one item, Harold's Cross. It does not account for the empty premises in Limerick. There is a call centre in Thurles. What is the cost of that? Bord na gCon is paying for a call centre in Thurles. Is that correct?

Mr. Phil Meaney

We sold the empty premises in Limerick.

No, I am referring to the premises overhead. I understand the second storey is empty. Does Bord na gCon have empty space in the Limerick premises?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes.

There are serious questions. I will come back to this.

There was a strategic plan for the period 2013 to 2017. The Indecon report was dated 7 July 2014. When was there an update of the strategic plan?

Dr. Seán Brady

29 May 2015.

It took into account Indecon's comment on the original plan. What is there now is an updated plan, which is due to expire very soon.

Dr. Seán Brady

At the end of this year.

I just want to understand the dates.

I want clarity because, in fairness, Deputy Connolly went through that forensically. I do not think anyone here was fully sure because the witnesses certainly were not.

I have so many questions about the IGB I do not know where to begin. I am surprised the witnesses are back here because I did not expect them to be back in their positions. Do they realise how bad the evidence they are giving looks to the people who are watching at home? Do they realise the number of contradictions in their evidence? This is the Committee of Public Accounts. It is a constitutional committee, the most important in the Oireachtas and the evidence the witnesses are giving here is the worst I have ever seen. Do they realise what I am saying to them? It is the worst I have ever seen and it is getting worse today, in reply to the questions asked by my predecessors. I would like the witnesses to reflect on that. I mean this: does each of the witnesses stand over the evidence given to date? If somebody does not, please say so now.

Mr. Phil Meaney

The chairman made the position on our strategic plan very clear.

We have to find-----

Mr. Phil Meaney

The Deputy asked a question and the least we should be given is an opportunity to answer.

That is no problem but I did not ask about the strategic plan. Go on.

Mr. Phil Meaney

As an example, it was very clear. Perhaps everybody did not pick it up, but the Chairman picked it up very clearly. There was a strategic plan for the period 2014 to 2017 which we submitted to the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. After the Indecon report, we made changes to that. Both expire at the end of this year.

I was talking in general. I was not even referring to the contradictions in respect of the reports and dates. Does each of the witnesses stand over the evidence they have given to date? I will presume if I do not hear anything else, the answer is "Yes". Do the witnesses have confidence in each another and in the board? If I do not hear anything else, I will take it that, yes, the witnesses all have confidence in each another and in the evidence given to date.

I see what has happened in recent weeks in respect of the sale of Harold's Cross, given the board that is in place, as a cross-subsidy. I do not have confidence in the board and I feel that this is double jeopardy in respect of this action. Deputy Cassells' questioning of Mr. Creed about the bank situation leaves me totally bewildered. There is certainly something that needs to be added. The witnesses need to reflect on that. Will Mr. Murnane provide evidence of what he said on the previous occasion about the sale of the Meelick site? I would like to check it.

Mr. Michael Murnane

The evidence would be complicated because the Comptroller and Auditor General issued a report in 2014 in respect of Meelick.

I have made a request.

Mr. Michael Murnane

If the Deputy clarifies the evidence, I have no issue whatsoever about furnishing it.

Deputy Connolly asked Mr. Meaney about the motion of no confidence and he said that was a certain view. I was there. There were over 700 people - virtually the entire industry - in Horse and Jockey. Mr. Meaney is right about one thing. There are different sections in this industry, there is fragmentation, there are different groups and they do not always agree with one another but they agreed that day. The 700 people there could not fit into the room, some had to stay in the lobby and the car park but they agreed that they did not have confidence in the witnesses. The fact that Mr. Meaney thinks there is only a certain view shows he is not living in the real world if he cannot see what is in front of him in the context of what the industry is saying. It is united on that.

On 5 April, Mr. Meaney stated "IGB is under pressure to manage a legacy debt now reduced to €20.3 million, which preceded the current chairman, board and executive of IGB." Is that true?

Mr. Phil Meaney

It is absolutely true.

Let me say that again, "IGB is under pressure to manage a legacy debt now reduced to €20.3 million, which preceded the current chairman, board and executive of IGB." So there was nobody on the board during this period which, as already stated, "preceded the current chairman, board and executive of IGB". Would Mr. Meaney now like to reflect on what he said? Is there a serving member of the board who was on the board during the period in question?

Mr. Phil Meaney

When I became chairman of Bord na gCon on 13 April 2011, the debt was €23.5 million and there was an IOU of €2.5 million in respect of Dundalk. The Deputy talks about the real world. That is the real world I took on as chairman.

I asked a question: was anyone present at this meeting on the board at that time? Mr. Meaney said it was a legacy and the people on the board now were not responsible for it. Was there anyone on the board? Mr. Meaney should remember where he is.

Mr. Phil Meaney

When I came onto the board in 2011, there was one board member who predated me.

In those circumstances, how can the statement to the effect that "IGB is under pressure to manage a legacy debt now reduced to €20.3 million, which preceded the current chairman, board and executive of IGB." be accurate? Mr. Meaney has given evidence to the effect that there is a member of the current board who was on the board during that time. How do those two statements even tally?

Mr. Phil Meaney

If the Deputy goes back to 2005-2006, the debt of the IGB was €15 million. Since it was set up, no board has ever paid back debt until this board. We are the first board to pay down debt before the sale of Harold's Cross, and our net debt at the end of December 2016 was €20.3 million. After coming through the worst economic crash we could ever have expected and solving a lot of problems, we managed to reduce the debt by €6 million in that period.

I asked a specific question as to whether there is someone present who was on the board during that time?

Mr. Phil Meaney

During which time?

This is the fourth time I have read out Mr. Meaney's statement. It says, "IGB is under pressure to manage a legacy debt now reduced to €20.3 million, which preceded the current chairman, board and executive of IGB."

Mr. Phil Meaney

The debt, as I say, when I came onto the board-----

Mr. Phil Meaney

Is the Deputy asking was here a board member on before me? There was a board member there before me but I am not able to tell the Deputy here and now what the precise debt was the day he came on.

I think everyone knows.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Everybody knows what?

As far as I can see, somebody who is present was on the board before Mr. Meaney's time and when this debt was incurred.

Mr. Phil Meaney

My clear understanding about the time before mine, if the Deputy is referring to the building of Limerick, is that the decision to build Limerick was made before that member came on board.

On the previous occasion on which he gave evidence, Mr. Meaney said:

Yes, in some shape or form, through syndication, family members or otherwise. Under the Act we are not allowed to have greyhounds in our own ownership.

He has stated to me and to everyone here that he stands over the evidence. If, on 4 May, he was not allowed to own greyhounds, how did he manage a few weeks later to own greyhounds?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Board members do not have greyhounds. I did not think that------

Is what the witness said inaccurate? If it is, let him say that is the case.

Mr. Phil Meaney

What I said on the previous occasion I was here was inaccurate.

Why did the witness say it?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Because I did not------

Did he believe it when he said it?

Mr. Phil Meaney

The Deputy has to give me an opportunity to answer his questions.

I am doing so.

Mr. Phil Meaney

He is not. I ask the Chairman-----

I will call the speakers. Everyone asks a question and the conversation is going this way, not across the floor.

Mr. Phil Meaney

It was not of huge concern the last day. As I understood it, no board members had dogs in their names so it was not a concern. I have since learned that board members are not prohibited from owning dogs. I was not aware of that on the previous occasion I was before the committee.

Who told the witness that?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Several people told me that. Does the Deputy want a specific name?

Did the witness get legal advice?

Mr. Phil Meaney

I got legal advice.

Did he ask the Department about this issue?

Mr. Phil Meaney

I did not ask the Department. I asked two legal people.

Does Mr. Gleeson know if board members are allowed own dogs?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

There is no statutory prohibition on board members owning dogs.

Mr. Meaney says that he stands over his evidence. On that day, he must have believed that board members were not allowed to own dogs.

Mr. Phil Meaney

We did not own dogs------

That is not my question. On that day, he said that, under the Act, board members were not allowed to own greyhounds. To be fair to him, he must have believed that was accurate on 4 May when he said it. If Mr. Brady has something to say, he might just say it.

Mr. Pat Creed

Through the Chair------

I asked Mr. Meaney a specific question.

Mr. Pat Creed

The Department has made the position crystal clear------

I am addressing a specific issue. Can Mr. Meaney answer the question?

Mr. Phil Meaney

I can only answer by saying that no board members owned dogs. I said that we could not or should not or do not own dogs. The Deputy has the exact-----

Can the witness verify that he believed that statement when he said it? There is nothing wrong with that. Is it correct that he believed what he said on the day?

Mr. Phil Meaney

It is correct.

That is not a big issue but it tells me that Mr. Meaney, chairman of Bord na gCon, gave evidence on 4 May that, under the Act, board members were not allowed to own greyhounds and he believed that. He did not know whether or not board members were allowed to own dogs because he did not know the Act. That is obvious because what he said is not accurate, as he has now admitted. The chairman of Bord na gCon did not know whether board members were allowed own dogs or not.

Mr. Phil Meaney

We do not own dogs. I feel and have felt for the past six years that we have far bigger problems to sort out than whether or not I had-----

I am moving on because we are pressured for time but I wanted that point on the record. One has to have confidence in the chairman of an organisation. Mr. Meaney did not know the Act. That is a fundamental issue.

I read the transcript of the evidence Mr. Walsh gave to this committee. He said that at the height of the recession, attendance figures dropped. He tried to manage that. He then said there was an increase of between 4% and 5% in attendance in 2015 compared to 2014 . Is that correct?

Mr. Colin Walsh

That is correct.

Mr. Walsh was boasting about increased attendance figures even though it was increasing from a base which was the lowest ever. However, there was an increase of between 4% and 5%.

Mr. Colin Walsh

The average attendance per meeting increased in 2015 relative to 2014.

Page 19 of the annual report states that attendance levels in 2014 were 644,000 and those in 2015 were 635,000. That is not an increase of between 4% and 5%, it is a decrease.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Just to-----

Mr. Colin Walsh

I can answer the question. The figure I gave was based on the average attendance per meeting. There was a 5% reduction in the number of meetings that year as part of the Indecon recalibration. The figures at the bottom of page 19 show a reduction in the number of races held in 2015 relative to the number held in 2014. If the Deputy performs a calculation using those figures he will find that my sums are correct and there was an increase of 4.3% year on year.

The witness is now saying that there was not an increase, that there was an average increase per meet.

Mr. Colin Walsh

That is what I said at the last meeting. As a result of the recalibration of racing, the metrics given in the 2015 annual report------

Mr. Colin Walsh

The Deputy made a point and I would like to respond to it. For income and attendance, the metrics in the annual report are based on an average per meeting basis.

Comparisons between the horse racing and greyhound industries were discussed on the previous occasion the witness gave evidence here. He said: "The on-Tote revenues for horse racing and greyhound racing have continued to operate in very challenging betting environments since 2007, with a decline in Tote revenues of 67.9% at domestic horse tracks and 66% at greyhound tracks." However, if one were to look at what was said at a meeting of this committee attended by Mr. Meaney and the former CEO, Mr. Neilan, several years ago which I had the pleasure of watching recently, you spoke about 30 contracts being signed in regard to expanding the capacity of the organisation to grow markets in Austria, Spain, and several other places. How many of those contracts were signed?

Mr. Colin Walsh

I did not speak about-----

I did not say the witness did so.

Mr. Colin Walsh

The Deputy said "you".

I intended to refer to Mr. Meaney. I apologise. I will return to the issue regarding revenue.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Mr. Neilan gave those figures.

Mr. Neilan was sitting beside Mr. Meaney.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Mr. Walsh may be more familiar with the exact figures than I am. We have signed several contracts, including one in relation to co-mingling and one involving Satellite Information Services, SIS. I made the point on a previous occasion that the board requested that Mr. Neilan's contract be extended because he was dealing with these contracts. We are behind where we expected to be but several contracts have now been signed and they are very lucrative.

Mr. Colin Walsh

The answer to the Deputy's question is four countries.

Four countries, not 30 countries. The feeling taken away from the meeting of the Committee of Public Accounts attended by Mr. Neilan, who has now moved on to pastures new, was that the greyhound industry was going to experience an upturn because 30 contracts were going to be signed. Four have been signed. Is that accurate?

Mr. Colin Walsh

Four contracts have been signed.

What happened to the other 26 contracts?

Mr. Phil Meaney

We are consistently working on co-mingling and SIS contracts, which are starting to prove very lucrative. The most recent contract was signed in February in respect of Tralee track.

Okay. When I say "okay" it is not that I accept that. It is incredible that-----

Mr. Michael Murnane

To correct the record, four independent television contracts have been signed, the most recent being signed in February 2017. That is a significant contract. In terms of the commingling international wagering deal which is being referred to, there have been approximately ten to 12 of those contracts signed since Mr. Neilan gave evidence to this committee in 2013.

The more correct figure would be in the region of 15 or 16 and not just four contracts.

What is the exact figure?

Mr. Michael Murnane

I would be far more comfortable saying 16 because there are four TV contracts.

Lads, come on. - this is just incredible. The witnesses are sitting beside one another.

Mr. Phil Meaney

One second-----

Hold on a second.

I will allow the Deputy put his question.

I have put a question. In previous evidence here, Mr. Nyhan was with Mr. Meaney, although to be fair it was not Mr. Meaney who said it but Mr. Nyhan. I am not going to wrong the pair because I watched the debate. It is funny, because 30 contracts were to be signed.

Please let the Deputy finish.

Whatever the witnesses come out with now, I am sure that the next figure will even be more amusing. A figure of four was mentioned. Mr. Walsh is the commercial director and he said four, but Mr. Murnane is more comfortable with a figure of 16. The board has come in here to meet the Committee of Public Accounts. In previous evidence the witnesses said there were 30 contracts but today they do not know how many have been signed.

Mr. Colin Walsh

To make the point again-----

Can we get clarifications from the witnesses on this matter?

Mr. Colin Walsh

I can give clarification, which I have just received from the director of tote who is seated behind me. Again, for the purpose of clarity, the Deputy said the word "you" but I did not say it.

Sorry. In fairness, in evidence I said that Mr. Nyhan had said it and it was 30.

Mr. Colin Walsh

That is okay.

Mr. Nyhan has verified that, to be fair.

Mr. Colin Walsh

Fair enough. The point that I made a while ago was in terms of four contracts. There were four contracts at the time so if I was not clear, my apologies. At the moment, there are 16 contracts signed plus SIS. That is the figure.

What period do the four contracts refer to?

Mr. Colin Walsh

My understanding is the point in time at the PAC meeting.

Does Mr. Walsh mean the last day here, which was two weeks ago?

Mr. Colin Walsh

No, when Mr. Nyhan was before the PAC meeting.

Mr. Colin Walsh

I do not know the time or the date.

When approximately? In what year?

Mr. Michael Murnane

It was 2014, I think.

Three years ago.

Four years ago.

Four contracts were signed in the 2013-2014 period and 16 are signed now.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Correct.

Is that it?

Mr. Colin Walsh

Yes. Correct.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Yes.

Obviously we do not want sensitive contractual information. Can the witnesses provide us with the dates and lists of contracts that it has done?

Mr. Michael Murnane

Yes.

The information will help us find out what has happened.

Mr. Walsh, in his evidence that he gave on the last day, said:

The on-Tote revenues for horse racing and greyhound racing have continued to operate in very challenging betting environments since 2007, with a decline in Tote revenues of 67.9% at domestic horse tracks and 66% at greyhound tracks.

The issue was raised by others and I commented on it, as Acting Chair, that the drop in greyhound compared with horse racing needed an explanation. Mr. Walsh continued:

Therefore, when one compares on-track Tote performance, there is a very similar level of decline. HRI has managed to offset the on-track decline with an exceptional performance in international markets, which would include the US, South Africa, Canada, France, Germany and Italy. Of those markets, IGB is only allowed to operate in the US. It is precluded legally from trading in terms of Tote.

I have a few questions. The organisation has signed 16 contracts. Where are they? What are the jurisdictions involved? Why has the measure not had a huge increase in the board's revenue?

The connotation of what Mr. Walsh said is that the HRI has offset the decline with an exceptional performance in international markets. I looked up the HRI. The HRI's total tote betting in 2015 was €79.3 million with international pools making up €5.4 million. Of the totality, the sum generated by international pools is not a huge amount.

Mr. Colin Walsh

When one takes the comparative figures from the annual reports issued by HRI and the IGB, one will see that the figures that I spoke about the last day and the trend, which we can furnish to the Deputy is he so wishes, bears that out.

Please forward the information.

Mr. Colin Walsh

We will. If one looks at the relativity between on-track tote and the gap between IGB and HRI tote, in seven the gap was about 31% and in 16 that gap has widened, between HRI and IGB on-track tote, in percentage terms.

I do not want to misrepresent Mr. Walsh.

Mr. Colin Walsh

Sure.

Mr. Walsh said: "HRI has managed to offset the on-track decline with an exceptional performance in international markets." It is €5.4 million so it is not a larger proportion.

Mr. Colin Walsh

The narrative at the time, and in advance of the meeting, was that HRI's on-track tote was outperforming that of IGB.

It does not add up.

Mr. Colin Walsh

Like I said to the Deputy, we can furnish him with the information-----

Mr. Colin Walsh

-----that is published in the annual reports of both the IGB and HRI.

I have done the addition.

Mr. Colin Walsh

The Deputy can analyse the information.

Obviously I have already examined the matter.

Mr. Colin Walsh

Okay. I have it here and I can give it to the Deputy. I have no problem doing so.

We will have a break shortly because members must leave the room to vote.

During the break the delegation can make copies, through our secretariat, that will be made available to us during the break so everyone will have a copy.

The IGB spoke about-----

We must move on to the next speaker but I am sure that the Deputy will contribute later.

Do not worry, I will. I could go on for days.

Mr. Walsh continued: "From a marketing perspective, we have a very clearly defined marketing strategy." On the last day I tried to save time by asking him to supply the committee with the strategy. What we received was a PowerPoint presentation.

Mr. Colin Walsh

To outline the strategy, yes.

As Vice Chairman I asked: "Can Mr. Walsh share a copy of the strategy with us?" Why have we not received a copy of the strategy? Mr. Meaney or Mr. Walsh can answer my question.

Mr. Colin Walsh

The marketing strategy for the organisation is contained in the PowerPoint presentation .

I will ask again. Can we have a copy of the strategy?

Mr. Colin Walsh

Okay. If the Deputy would like the strategy in a different format to a PowerPoint presentation then we can supply that.

No. That is not the question I asked. I asked the following. Can we have a copy of the strategy as it was designed a number of years ago? Does a hard copy or electronic copy exist? Is there a marketing strategy laid out in a document for the industry that is not a PowerPoint presentation?

Mr. Colin Walsh

I can furnish the committee with that, yes.

Does it exist?

Mr. Colin Walsh

Yes.

We asked for it but Mr. Walsh still has not supplied it to the committee. If it exists then why did Mr. Walsh not give it to the committee?

Mr. Colin Walsh

The document that the committee received contains the marketing strategy.

That is not what we asked for. We asked for the marketing strategy.

Mr. Colin Walsh

The committee asked for the marketing strategy and received it. What we are discussing is the format of the strategy.

No. Do not put words in my mouth. I said: "Can Mr. Walsh share a copy of the strategy with us?"

(Interruptions.)

Yes, and basically Mr. Walsh has not.

Mr. Colin Walsh

The committee has received the details of the marketing strategy.

I have not received the strategy though.

Mr. Colin Walsh

We can forward the strategy.

During the break I suggest that Mr. Walsh gets somebody in his organisation to email the secretariat a copy of the strategy. I have looked at the PowerPoint presentation.

We are finishing up now with that question.

I have loads more questions.

The Deputy can comment later.

I have looked at the PowerPoint strategy. In a previous life I was a business manger in Bord Fáilte or Fáilte Ireland so I know a little bit about marketing and online space. To say the strategy is poor would be an understatement.

Before I conclude my round of questioning, I would like to ask Mr. Meaney a specific question. Obviously Mr. Meaney has had some engagement, significant or otherwise, with the industry given the situation we find ourselves in over the past number of weeks or months. He has had to deal with the industry. Let us call a spade a spade. He has probably had difficult conversations and different people in touch with him or vice versa. I presume the situation has not been easy because we are dealing with a very difficult situation. If any of what I have said is unfair or inaccurate then please say so.

I have permission to state the following name. Does Mr. Meaney know a Miss Clare Hanley?

Mr. Phil Meaney

I do not know her but I know who she is, yes.

Did Mr. Meaney ring her on 20 April?

Mr. Phil Meaney

I did.

What was the purpose of that telephone call?

Mr. Phil Meaney

The purpose of the phone call was, which the board or the executive probably would not even be aware of, that I got a number of intimidating messages, letters, texts and faxes.

Is Mr. Meaney suggesting that they came from her?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes. Deputy, I need an opportunity to answer the question. One of them did not come directly to me but was sent by Clare Hanley to somebody who forwarded it on. I know Clare Hanley's people. I certainly phoned her. The things that she said about me in that correspondence are very, very untrue. Maybe I should have given them to a solicitor. I did not because I am not that kind of an individual.

Was her work situation raised in the conversation?

Mr. Pat Creed

Chairman, is this appropriate to the-----

Mr. Pat Creed

Is this appropriate-----

Mr. Pat Creed

I am asking the Chairman whether this is appropriate.

I am just trying to-----

We will go into private session for a moment - just a moment - because I do not know where this is going.

Fine. I was asked, by the way-----

Yes, but that does not mean-----

I know. I understand.

-----we have to go along with that.

I can leave this if the Chairman so wishes.

I ask the Deputy to leave it because when I hear him talking about an individual-----

I do not know where this is leading.

I did not know the witness was going to say that stuff either. I am fine. I can move on.

We will move on from that topic.

I have no problem with that.

The Deputy can make a further contribution.

I have loads more questions.

I will let Mr. Meaney and the other witnesses know where we are. Those who have indicated have asked their first rounds of questions between our previous meeting and this meeting. Some members have indicated to make a second contribution. We will start with Deputies Cullinane, MacSharry, Aylward and Burke. However, before we proceed to the second round, I have three brief questions to put to the witnesses. I was not at the previous meeting, so if some of this was covered then, I apologise for going back over it. These are points that came to my attention as the meeting went along.

Deputy Connolly mentioned the consultative forum. When is it next due to meet?

Mr. Phil Meaney

One month after we get back to racing in Shelbourne.

That is what I thought Mr. Meaney said. IGB has suspended a consultative forum until-----

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes. There was no racing in Dublin-----

Was the consultative forum only for Dublin?

Mr. Phil Meaney

No. We-----

I know there is the issue in Harold's Cross and Shelbourne, but why would you suspend the entire consultative forum and decide not to have any consultation as part of the consultation forum until Shelbourne is reopened? Mr. Meaney understands-----

Mr. Phil Meaney

I understand the Chairman's question.

-----how I felt his remark sounded.

Mr. Phil Meaney

We have no problem having a forum get together at any stage. It has been a difficult time, as we said at the previous meeting here. We often have two board meetings in a week. It has been a very difficult time. There were a number of difficulties but if the industry feels a consultative forum would help things prior to that, we have no problem having one.

Whom is it up to to call such a meeting?

Mr. Phil Meaney

As chairman of the board, I have generally set such dates. By the way, we had a meeting scheduled for 23 February, which did not go ahead, obviously.

As Chairman, I am confused that Dr. Brady says he wants to make every effort to consult, mediate and talk and then, in the next breath, Mr. Meaney says he is suspending the consultative forum. That sounds contradictory to me. Does Mr. Meaney understand the point I am making?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes.

That is all I am saying. I have just been listening to the two of them this morning. I did not have any prior knowledge of this.

Perhaps I will ask Mr. Creed the second question. It is about the bank. The witnesses have confirmed that the bank has not offered any write-down on the debt but did IGB raise, or will it raise, the question of a write-down? IGB owes a bank a lot of money. This debt goes back and has been building up over a decade. If IGB is coming in with an ability perhaps to clear the decks, I would expect the board to expect some element of write-down. While one has not been offered, does IGB expect it will look for one?

Mr. Pat Creed

We have already looked for one.

Fine. This is where I was trying to be helpful to Deputy Cassells earlier in his questioning. The bank has not offered a write-down, but the second half of the question was whether the IGB has sought one. Mr. Creed said IGB has sought a write-down, which I understand, but that discussions are still ongoing. In other words, IGB has sought a write-down but it has not been offered. It is still in the melting pot.

Mr. Pat Creed

The bank debt has changed dramatically in the last four weeks. Four weeks ago, we had a bank debt of €20-odd million and had no idea what the realisable value of the sale of the asset was. We now have a sale of an asset, pending process, of €23 million. I am sure the bank will take a different view on it now on the basis of sales proceeds, but discussions are ongoing at this point in time.

Obviously, this is a game-changer for IGB's debt-----

Mr. Pat Creed

It is a game-changer on both sides.

Yes. That is why I ask the question. Does the IGB have an expected completion date as to when it will receive that funding?

Mr. Pat Creed

No. Funding-----

Does Mr. Creed expect to receive it this year? The money-----

Mr. Pat Creed

No. As I understand it, a portion of it will come in this year and the balance will come in in January 2018.

Will Mr. Creed give us the expected timescale of the receipt of funds?

Dr. Seán Brady

On the signing of contracts, the deposit is paid. On the transfer of ownership, I do not remember the number but there is a significant payment. The final payment is scheduled for early January or depending on the closure date.

The reason the witnesses are here is that IGB receives substantial funding from the Irish State and taxpayers, and there are competing demands for those funds. Judging from IGB's own financial management, approximately how much does it expect to receive this calendar year and how much does it expect to receive in the beginning of next year?

Dr. Seán Brady

May I check that?

Dr. Seán Brady

I will answer the Chairman after lunch. I just do not have the number in my head at the moment.

Does Mr. Creed have any further information on that?

Mr. Pat Creed

No.

He seemed to know about the bank.

Mr. Pat Creed

Off the top of my head-----

Dr. Seán Brady

Chairman-----

Dr. Brady can come back to us after lunch.

Mr. Michael Murnane

It is €13 million this year and €10 million next year.

IGB expects to receive €13 million-----

Mr. Michael Murnane

Yes, but that is all subject to contract.

It is all subject to everything going ahead.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Yes.

The expectation at this point is that IGB will receive €13 million this year, which will go to the bank, and €10 million as soon as possible, which will probably come out of next year's departmental Estimate.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Do not flog me on that. That could change-----

Fine. I just wanted to clarify that.

Questions about attendance were asked. I will ask my last question, the answer to which the witnesses must know from their own knowledge. It was said the average attendance in 2014 was 371 per meet and 387 in 2015. This year, to date, what is the average attendance at the meets being held? It was said 30,000 a year are being lost in Dublin. Obviously, there is racing going on. How many venues are still having racing? There are people in this room and people watching with an intimate knowledge of the industry; there are other people who do not have that level of knowledge. I put my question from the point of view of the layman. How many tracks are still operating this year?

Mr. Colin Walsh

They are all operating except Harold's Cross and Shelbourne.

How many is that?

Mr. Colin Walsh

It is 15.

Approximately how many meets have been held this year?

Mr. Colin Walsh

I can furnish the Chairman with that information after lunch.

The question is very simple. Mr. Meaney said that when one decides, one divides. Obviously, some people are most unhappy with the situation. I have no idea of the numbers. I am just being logical in my question. Obviously, if there are people going to the other 15 venues for meetings, they are still continuing to go to their meets. What I want to establish is the attendance at the meetings in 2017 to date in those areas and how the figures from those 15 tracks compare with the same period last year. The witnesses should be able to do up rough figures-----

Mr. Colin Walsh

We will give the Chairman the figures when we have access to them.

-----over the break. They should be able to give us an indication of what is happening aside from the controversy here in Dublin because a lot goes on in the country.

That is all. Those thoughts just occurred to me during the course of this morning's meeting. I call Deputy Cullinane.

I welcome back all our witnesses. First, I want to be very fair to all of them who have come back on a second occasion. My questions are solely in the context of process and decision-making. I appreciate that many of the mistakes, as I would see them, that were made in the past were made by a previous board.

Second, it would be helpful if the witnesses answered as frankly as they can the questions that are put. If they do not know the answer to a question, they should just say as much because it rules out unnecessary conflict. If I ask a simple question about valuations or whatever it may be, if they have the answer at their fingertips, that is great; if they do not, they can forward the information. It is just a more efficient way of doing our business.

I must put it to them first, though, that there is a reading of the facts as they were presented at the last hearing and a narrative, which may or may not be true or fair, that the sale of the Harold's Cross stadium is essentially a Government bailout of a failed Government-appointed quango. That is one of the narratives or readings out there, and they must accept that. Obviously, they might have a different view. What they need to do is work with me to counter that narrative and answer the questions I put to them.

What is the current level of debt within the organisation? I want the actual amount and not rounded figures.

Mr. Michael Murnane

What we owe at this moment in time - actually it is the end of March but I would imagine it has not changed that much - is €18.1 million.

A few minutes ago somebody mentioned €20 million that was going back a couple of weeks.

Mr. Michael Murnane

That would be movement in the overdraft between the December year-end and that March-April time.

Okay.

The Cathaoirleach asked the board member, Mr. Creed, whether the organisation had sought a write-down from the bank. Did he say that a write-down was sought?

Mr. Pat Creed

Yes, we had discussions with the bank. They have been going on for a number of months now. I suppose at the point we were having discussions with the bank we did not have any idea what the realisable value of the asset was. So we would have been saying to them on the basis of the EBITDA that we were able to produce that we were trying to work out the level of debt that the business could sustain. In that context the situation would be that we would not be able to meet the level of debt that was outstanding at the time.

I asked when the request for the write-down was made. Was it made before or after a decision was made to sell Harold's Cross?

Mr. Pat Creed

Before.

When? Does Mr. Creed have even an approximate date as to when?

Mr. Pat Creed

A month, I would say, before Harold's Cross went through.

One month before a decision was made to sell this asset, the board made a request. Was it signed off on by the board that IGB would write to the bank to seek a write-down?

Mr. Pat Creed

A meeting was held by two board members and Michael with the bank.

With the consent of the board. Was it discussed at a board meeting that IGB would do this?

Mr. Pat Creed

It would have been up for discussion, yes.

There was a board meeting. At the time the debt would have been higher. It was probably €20 million or more.

Mr. Pat Creed

It was €20.3 million.

It needed to reduce this unsustainable debt. It needed to go to the bank and seek a write-down of the debt. Is that what happened?

Mr. Pat Creed

Yes. It was not a matter of having to go to the bank; the bank wanted us in.

I understand that. IGB had to go to the bank, either because the bank wanted it in or the board needed to deal with the unsustainable debt.

Mr. Pat Creed

The bank wanted us in because it wanted to know what was happening with the debt and we needed to go in because we needed facilities to keep trading.

I appreciate that. Did one meeting or a number of meetings take place to discuss a request for a write-down?

Mr. Pat Creed

There was one meeting that the board was at and then there were a number of meetings that a representative of the business was liaising with the bank on our behalf.

What was the response from the bank?

Mr. Pat Creed

Ongoing discussions. There was no commitment on either side.

They were ongoing, so it did not refuse a write-down.

Mr. Pat Creed

It did not refuse a write-down initially, but there was a meeting prior to the sale of Harold's Cross where it put something in the room to say that a write-down was not on its agenda.

However, it had still not refused it.

Mr. Pat Creed

Correct.

There were ongoing discussions about the possibility of a write-down. Did Mr. Creed say he works or did work in the banking sector?

Mr. Pat Creed

I do.

As Mr. Creed works in the banking sector, he knows that the banks will play hardball and will not show their negotiating hand. There were ongoing discussions on the possibility of a write-down before a decision was made to sell Harold's Cross. Is that not correct?

Mr. Pat Creed

Correct. We sought it on the basis that we did not see that we could meet the debt that was there at that point of time. Things have changed since that. Discussions are ongoing now again.

That is what I am getting to. Given the board took a decision to sell Harold's Cross, the chances of a write-down from the bank now are pretty slim to none. Would Mr. Creed accept that?

Mr. Pat Creed

I would say it is much more difficult, yes.

I would go further than much more difficult and say practically zero because the valuation that has been put in the public domain by the Secretary General of the Department of Education and Skills essentially wipes out the debt anyway, if that goes through. Is that not true?

Mr. Pat Creed

Correct.

In addition to the Government through the Department of Education and Skills potentially purchasing this land and bailing out essentially a failing organisation, the banks were also let off the hook. Now the bank does not have to give any kind of write-down. Is this sale again letting the bank off the hook?

Mr. Pat Creed

What this sale is doing is solving a legacy problem that has crippled this industry for a long number of years. This industry has not had enough capital and enough cash to generate what it needs to pay, more importantly, prize money to owners, trainers and breeders. What this debt write-down does is that it puts the board in a position that it can have a sustainable future going forward and it can significantly increase prize money in the foreseeable future provided we get Shelbourne Park back opening, because without Shelbourne Park opening we are haemorrhaging on a daily basis.

I understand that. However, once a decision was made to proceed with selling Harold's Cross, the opportunity of getting a write-down essentially disappeared, which means that the bank no longer needs to consider that option which was under consideration, at least, in the past. The prospect of getting a write-down from the bank is now gone. I have made that point and Mr. Creed has responded.

Mr. Pat Creed

May I just respond?

Mr. Pat Creed

Do not make decisions before we get to the final stages of conclusions, please.

Mr. Pat Creed

Do not make decisions like that until we get to the final stage of discussions.

I have not made any decisions.

Mr. Pat Creed

The presumption is that there will not be a write-down. I think it is too early to say that. That is my opinion.

The Deputy should not weaken the board's hand in negotiations.

I had asked Mr. Creed earlier and he said they had been significantly weakened. He was the one who said that. We all live in the real world. If an organisation has a debt of over €20 million that is a real issue the bank has to deal with. If it wipes out its debt, it is an issue the bank does not have to deal with. Whatever negotiating hand Mr. Creed believes he has, once a decision is made to sell Harold's Cross, everybody can see that the Irish Greyhound Board's negotiating hand in terms of getting a bank write-down is significantly weakened. Saying that is not to weaken its hand, it is just a fact. It is a reality and Mr. Creed has already accepted that. I will move on from that.

It is remarkable that the valuation again hits the bull's-eye here. It essentially completely wipes out the debt. The valuation of the land is almost identical to what would be required to wipe out the debt. Can Mr. Gleeson see why that would at least solicit questions from us on the Committee of Public Accounts?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

I can see why the Deputy might ask that question but I do not think it has any validity because the valuation was one provided by the Valuation Office. If there are questions about the valuation, it is a question for that office; I am not competent to answer them.

Again, getting straight answers when I put the questions, how many valuations for Harold's Cross were done either by the Department or by the board in recent years and who carried them out?

Dr. Seán Brady

To my knowledge, the most recent valuation was carried out by, as Mr. Gleeson said, the Valuation Office. Savills also carried out a valuation. I am not aware of any others.

On whose behalf did Savills carry out a valuation?

Dr. Seán Brady

On behalf of the Irish Greyhound Board.

What was the valuation?

Dr. Seán Brady

That is a commercially sensitive matter at this point.

Is it less than the amount the Department is paying?

Dr. Seán Brady

It is commercially sensitive.

We have to accept that now. We cannot compromise commercial sensitivity.

With respect we went through this the last time. There is a closed purchase here. We are not in a competitive process. The Department has disclosed to us that it is purchasing this land for, I believe, €23 million. Therefore there is not really any competitive tension of any description. It is a closed process where there is only a buyer and seller and that is it. We are trying to establish whether the taxpayer is getting good value for money here. We have been told that the Department has valued it at €23 million, has it not?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

The Valuation Office.

Sorry, the Valuation Office has valued it at €23 million. A separate valuation was done by the board. It would be useful for us to know what that valuation was in order to ascertain if the taxpayer is getting good value for money. I fail to see how that is commercially sensitive.

Dr. Seán Brady

I disagree.

If there is a closed process, how is it commercially sensitive? If it can be explained to me how it is commercially sensitive, I can accept it.

Dr. Seán Brady

Mr. Chair-----

I am not saying it is not; I just want to be fair.

Allow Dr. Brady to respond.

Dr. Seán Brady

We are following the DPER process, the DPER circular. Until IGB has money in its bank from the Department of Education and Skills, the deal is not there. At this point in time they are preferred buyers of the site, but until IGB has a cheque in its-----

Bank account.

Dr. Seán Brady

Yes.

On that, when the transaction is completed is one issue. If this preferred bidder does not complete the transaction, it is back on the market again and IGB has to disclose that information; it could compromise the situation.

While Deputy MacSharry also wishes to come in, I note the voting time is coming up.

I think we are all right for a few minutes.

I ask Deputy Cullinane to be as quick as possible.

I am asking direct questions and I want straightforward answers. The Meelick site, on which we had some discussion the last time, was bought for €1.5 million. Is that correct?

Mr. Michael Murnane

It was bought for €1.04 million.

And now what is it valued at?

Mr. Michael Murnane

Approximately €100,000.

Since the time it was bought for €1.04 million, has the site been valued by the current or previous board?

Mr. Michael Murnane

This is a site of between 14 and 16 acres and we got a valuation but we did not get a formal valuation. Its valuation as agricultural land is about €100,000. Let me explain to the Deputy - again I refer to the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General - the Meelick site collapsed in value back in 2006, when Bord na gCon tried to secure the development potential of the site but access to the road between Limerick and Ennis was turned down.

I am asking Mr. Murnane a very straight question. I understand that it was bought for €1 million. Since it was bought, was it ever valued by the organisation for a higher amount above the €1 million that was paid for it?

Mr. Michael Murnane

Not that I am aware of, Deputy.

Is Mr. Murnane clear on that?

Mr. Michael Murnane

I have no information that would indicate that.

Will Mr. Murnane find out to make sure that is the case? Will he communicate with the committee secretariat on what he finds out?

If Mr. Murnane checks the financial statement, it will tell him.

A final question, because I know that time is up, concerns the conditionality on the sale because from my reading of the letter from the Secretary General of the Department of Education and Skills, the sale is subject to rezoning. Is that correct Mr. Gleeson?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

That is my understanding.

At present the Harold's Cross track is zoned for recreational use.

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

That is my understanding also.

Did somebody say earlier that a previous rezoning application was made but was refused?

Mr. Michael Murnane

That is correct, a proposal to rezone it for housing was refused.

When was that made?

Mr. Michael Murnane

An application was submitted at the end of 2015 and the beginning of 2016. It was declined by the Dublin City Council at the end of 2016.

Mr. Gleeson will be familiar with the Government circular that he referenced and a copy of which he gave to me at the last meeting, which states that it is advisable to ask the local authority to confirm that it has no objections to the particular development proposal for the site in question. Obviously the development proposal is to build a number of schools. Was the local authority in question informed in line with the Government circular?

This is a question that should be directed to the Department of Education and Skills.

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

I do not know. It is a question for the Department of Education and Skills.

We will write immediately to the Department of Education and Skills because only that Department that can answer that question. The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine has no role in that area.

That is why I asked earlier whether an official from the Department of Education and Skills was present.

They are not here.

Okay. The sale is subject to rezoning. Must a rezoning application be made to the local authority and approved by the local authority before the sale is concluded? Is that the official view of the process?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

I have read the same letter as Deputy Cullinane has. What I am assuming is that the finalisation of the sale will be contingent on the appropriate zoning. It also needs the sanction of the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform.

Before the deal is concluded and any money is exchanged I understand Mr. Gleeson's view is the same as mine; a formal application for rezoning must be made. That will have to be considered; it goes out for public consultation. We all know there is a process involved in terms of rezoning, it is a material contravention of a development plan and so on, so a zoning decision will have to be made and granted by a local authority. Is it Mr. Gleeson's understanding that then and only then can the sale conclude?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

My understanding is that the contract will be signed, subject to rezoning.

Who would make the application for rezoning? Would it be the board or the Department? Will it still be in the ownership of the board?

Dr. Seán Brady

Chairman, the Department for Education and Skills will be making that application.

May I clarify for the record, there are two different legal processes in terms of planning and the Deputy has merged them into the one sentence. People may think they are the same process: rezoning is a function of a development plan process, material contravention of a development plan is a different issue. What can happen is that if the zoning on the site is not appropriate to the planning application being considered, the application can go in as a planning application and the local authority, with the consent of the planners and the elected members can agree to grant a material contravention for that site for that specific purpose. It is a separate process from opening up the rezoning in a development plan. A material contravention is normally how these things tend to happen.

I understand that.

I make this point for the public who may be watching the proceedings.

I want to be absolutely clear about the process, which is all I am concerned about. If my reading of the letter from the Secretary General of the Department of Education and Skills is correct - Mr. Gleeson seems to be of the same opinion - the deal is subject to rezoning. I want to be certain about what "subject to rezoning" means. I acknowledge that Mr. Gleeson cannot answer for the Department of Education and Skills but he can give me the perspective of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. Is it the case that an application will have to be made by the Department to the local authority seeking the rezoning of the site? The local authority will have to follow a process before making a decision. If the decision is favourable the sale will go ahead, but if it is not rezoned the sale will not go ahead. Is that Mr. Gleeson's understanding?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

That is my understanding.

Mr. Pat Creed

Chairman, I wish to make a correction. The Meelick site cost €1 million but another €900,000 was spent on the Meelick site so the liability was actually €1.9 million and a further €200,000 was used to use the site maps for the current Limerick stadium, so the net loss arising from Meelick at this point in time is €1.7 million less the realisable value of the asset.

I thank the witnesses for returning before the Committee of Public Accounts. I will continue with questions on the Harold's Cross stadium. It was stated that the Department of Education and Skills had looked at the site initially in March 2016, which is a little over a year ago. Who said that?

Mr. Michael Murnane

I do not know about March, but June 2016 was mentioned. I do not have the exact date, but it was in 2016.

Somebody said March.

Mr. Michael Murnane

March, April.

How did that information come out? Did somebody in the Department of Education and Skills ring the office of Bord na gCon asking if there was any chance of looking at the stadium?

Mr. Michael Murnane

It was in the public domain. It was published through Indecon that Harold's Cross Stadium would be up for sale, as the board had accepted its proposals to sell the Harold's Cross stadium and we were in the process of trying to have the site rezoned. I do not know the nature of the communication.

Was it not in March 2017 that Bord na gCon decided to sell it? Is that not what Dr. Brady said?

Dr. Seán Brady

Yes, that is what I said.

But really the decision was taken the year before.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Chairman, I am sorry, I will correct it.

Dr. Seán Brady

I can go back even further. Indecon said in 2014 that-----

That was the Indecon report of 2014 that was given to the board to consider.

Dr. Seán Brady

Yes.

At what point did the board decide that it would do what the Indecon report recommended and would sell the Harold's Cross stadium?

Mr. Phil Meaney

The Indecon report was published in July 2014. When the Indecon report was accepted by the then Minister and came back to the board in October 2014, Bord na gCon accepted the recommendations in full, that is the 27 recommendations of the Indecon report.

Was that in July 2014?

Mr. Phil Meaney

October 2014.

After October 2014, it was not officially on the market. Dr. Brady stated that Bord na gCon decided to sell Harold's Cross in March 2017. Was there another consideration of what was agreed in 2014?

Dr. Seán Brady

The decision was made in principle to accept the recommendations of the Indecon report. I do not think we picked out Harold's Cross or any other site. We unanimously accepted the recommendations of the Indecon report.

What happened in March 2017?

Dr. Seán Brady

The board took a decision that the Harold's Cross site would be sold.

Were the valuations done by Savills before that meeting?

Dr. Seán Brady

Yes.

Was the valuation by Savills provided to the Department of Education and Skills?

Dr. Seán Brady

No.

Was it provided to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform or the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine?

Dr. Seán Brady

No.

To get back to how the Department of Education and Skills came along, it made contact on the back of the broad acceptance of the Indecon report's 27 recommendations and it asked to have a look at that. Is that what happened?

Mr. Michael Murnane

Representatives of the Department of Education and Skills came and explored the site. In October 2014, the board adopted the principle of introducing an asset disposal strategy involving Harold's Cross. The board then started-----

When was that?

Mr. Michael Murnane

October 2014.

Bord na gCon decided in principle to sell it at that stage.

Mr. Michael Murnane

We decided in principle to introduce the disposal strategy, including the sale of Harold's Cross. That was 2014.

That is not what they said. They said they accepted the recommendations of the report in full. One of them was to do with gender balance on the board. Is that right?

It was to do with terms.

It was to do with terms. Bord na gCon accepted it but has not implemented it yet.

Mr. Phil Meaney

It requires primary legislation.

So Bord na gCon is doing that.

Mr. Michael Murnane

To go back to my point, it was incumbent on the IGB to try to extract maximum value from the property. It was felt at that stage that a zoning application would draw better value from the property if at all possible. That zoning application drew its own publicity. If it is from there the Department of Education and Skills made the introduction to the IGB. I do not have the detail.

A vote has been called in the Dáil.

Will I be in possession when we come back?

Yes. The voting bloc in the Dáil will take an hour and a half because there are six or seven votes. We will suspend until 3 p.m. Deputy MacSharry is in possession.

Before we leave, I remind those in the Public Gallery to allow witnesses to come and go during the break without any interference. We had an issue the previous day and we do not want any repeat of it today.

Sitting suspended at 1.02 p.m. and resumed at 3.10 p.m.

We will resume our discussion of the 2015 Financial Statements of Bord na gCon. Before we suspended the meeting Deputy Marc MacSharry was speaking.

We were discussing March 2016 when the Department of Education and Skills had come to see the site. Was it an unsolicited approach?

Mr. Michael Murnane

Yes, it was unsolicited but there had been various references in the press concerning the zoning application and it was disclosed in our annual report for 2014 that to address our going concern we would be disposing of assets, including Harold's Cross, so it was no secret.

So they heard it around the bush fire and they made an approach and asked if they could have a look.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Yes, I presume so.

Were there any contacts in the period of the change-over? Did they just die away?

Mr. Michael Murnane

At that stage we were going through the zoning process. We were going to see the zoning process out and the Department of Education and Skills was made aware of that. That was not seen out until close to 2016.

Is it correct to say the application at the time was for zoning for housing?

Mr. Michael Murnane

Housing or alternative uses outside of the Z9 zoning.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Leisure and recreational use.

Presumably there was a vote in the council on determining whether the zoning would happen.

Mr. Michael Murnane

I think so. Yes.

Does Mr. Murnane remember the result of that?

Mr. Michael Murnane

I do not.

Does 33 votes to two ring a bell?

Mr. Michael Murnane

I will put it like this, I had an idea from the open meeting we had that the vote was going against us but I do not recall what the score was.

I will put it on the record that to the best of my knowledge the vote was 33 to two against. Does Mr. Murnane remember the reasons the council gave?

Mr. Michael Murnane

I do not.

Was it due to increased congestion in the area? Does that ring a bell?

Mr. Michael Murnane

I do not recall.

I suggest that might be one of the reasons at the time. Bord na gCon did not get the zoning then. At that stage did the board park the theory of selling the site for a while?

Mr. Michael Murnane

At that stage we were in a position where we needed to talk to our bank because there was a hard deadline of 9 December 2016 and we had to discuss our options with AIB. That is where we were. As has been said previously, AIB's position was quite simple - either IGB sold Harold's Cross or they would sell it.

Or they would sell it. In the context of AIB preparing to sell it, did they carry out an evaluation?

Mr. Michael Murnane

Not to my knowledge. I have no copy of any valuation from AIB.

So they did not send in auctioneer A to review the site or to take a view on what way to proceed.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Not to my knowledge.

Did Dr. Brady say that following the board meeting in March 2017 where it was approved for a second time that it would proceed with the sale he informed the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine?

Dr. Seán Brady

Yes

The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine informed the Department of Education and Skills and it came back to the board and said it should engage with the Department of Education and Skills.

Dr. Seán Brady

The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine told me that the Department of Education and Skills could or would - I cannot remember precisely what I was told at the time - be interested in the site and subsequently I received a call from an official in the Department of Education and Skills.

Is it correct that this was in line with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform circular? We established on the previous occasion that there is a circular but it is not a statutory instrument.

Dr. Seán Brady

Yes, Deputy MacSharry is correct.

So there is nothing in law that binds the board to follow that process. Does Mr. Gleeson believe that is correct?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

Yes.

I suppose in the interest of good relations the board decided it should listen to the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, talk to the Department of Education and Skills and pursue that approach. Was it at that time the board asked for a valuation from Savills or did it have that already?

Dr. Seán Brady

No. That was already concluded. That formed part of the decision making at the March board meeting.

Dr. Brady said it would be commercially sensitive to tell us the valuation at this time because the site is not sold. That is a reasonable position for now. Following the closure, whether it is sold to the Department of Education and Skills or not, at that stage could the valuation be made available to the Committee of Public Accounts, albeit that it might be in six months' or a year's time? Is Dr. Brady aware of comparisons in the area of sales of similar land?

Dr. Seán Brady

No, I am not an auctioneer. I am sorry, I have knowledge of a Rehab site that was sold somewhere. I do not know Dublin well.

It is unusual that Dr. Brady would pick that one.

Dr. Seán Brady

Deputy MacSharry asked me a question and on recall I remember that. I am not an expert on property.

As a matter of interest, why did Dr. Brady think of that site?

Dr. Seán Brady

A brother of mine told me that it meant good money. I do not know the specific details of it but it was a site-----

The irony is that the purchaser was also the Department of Education and Skills.

Dr. Seán Brady

I was not aware of that.

I suggest to the Chairman that we should bring in representatives of the Department of Education and Skills to talk about the purchase price of that particular site but also this one, because as an auctioneer and not having viewed the site, and I know Dr. Brady cannot give the Savills valuation, I believe the current value of the six acres at Harold's Cross, with its current zoning, is probably €750,000 an acre. With the appropriate zoning to allow for institutional use, the market value is probably €1.5 million an acre, which is very substantially less than €23 million. Dr. Brady mentioned the Rehab site. That is ironic because, similarly, while those values would apply, and I believe that site was in Sandyford, which would not be as good an area in terms of property values, the Department of Education and Skills paid more than €5 million per acre for institutional zoning for a site on which there was a listed building. To my mind, that is a multiple of the value per acre. There is a major value for money issue here and there is also the coincidence of Bord na gCon's entire debt having to match broadly the profile of the proposed purchase price.

In terms of the split of the €13 million and the €10 million to be worked out subject to contract, as Mr. Murnane said, is there a structure to the deal in that if Bord na gCon does not get zoning, it will get €13 million and not the additional €10 million?

Dr. Seán Brady

No.

Everything is agreed at €23 million or nothing is agreed. It is not staggered in that Bord na gCon will get €13 million and the other €10 million later.

Dr. Seán Brady

No.

This deal with the Department of Education and Skills is subject to rezoning.

Dr. Seán Brady

Yes.

On what basis do we believe the outcome would be any different with the county council, given the 33-2 defeat that happened the last time?

Dr. Seán Brady

I believe the Department of Education and Skills will seek rezoning. I am not an expert on property. I am the chief executive, and my role is to do the best I am able to do for the organisation.

Dr. Seán Brady

The board decided that the offer was an acceptable offer.

I would say it was-----

Dr. Seán Brady

That is what the board decided.

-----because it is a multiple of what it is worth. When we consider that we are not long finished with Project Eagle, this would seem to indicate that between Rehab and this particular purchase, we are overpaying. That is something that needs to be noted. I imagine the board would be very happy with €23 million, and I would suspect that the Savills valuation, which is naturally commercially sensitive at this time, is substantially less than that. That is why it will be interesting to see it after Bord na gCon closes its sale.

In terms of a write-down from the bank, does Dr. Brady not believe that at this stage Bord na gCon has a snowball's chance in hell of getting a write-down on the basis that it is in the public domain and it is getting €23 million?

Dr. Seán Brady

I think Mr. Creed is the best man on our team to deal with that question.

Mr. Pat Creed

I do not know. All I can say to the Deputy is that six or eight weeks ago, that was on the agenda. It is still on the agenda, but I am cautious of damaging any discussions that are ongoing. They are in public view, and we are about to continue the negotiations with our bank. To have an opinion on it here probably damages the ongoing negotiations.

I will put it another way. If I bought a combine harvester, borrowed €250,000 from, say, a finance company and I defaulted on those loans, if I was selling, with the finance company's consent, and got €250,000, in Mr. Creed's professional opinion, what is the likelihood that it might accept €180,000?

Mr. Pat Creed

It is unlikely, but the circumstances might not be that-----

It is unlikely. In terms of natural fairness and justice, why should Bord na gCon get a write-down? Home owners throughout the country have been pinned to the wall for every ha'penny, and they have been pursued after the fact. Why should a special deal be done for Bord na gCon, a quasi arm of the State, which has received a premium on top of a premium for land? However, that is an aside.

I want to put on record my view of the valuation, which is €750,000 per acre on its current zoning and about €1.5 million per acre if it gets zoned for institutional use. I wish Bord na gCon luck in that regard in terms of Dublin City Council, which as I said last time defeated the proposals 33-2.

Bord na gCon has a call centre in Thurles. What does that do?

Dr. Seán Brady

It takes bookings for our stadia. If people want to go greyhound racing, they can ring the call centre which takes bookings.

For tickets to come in or-----

Dr. Seán Brady

Mainly to come in, and also for meals in the stadia.

They book a table in some of the better stadia that have the restaurants.

Dr. Seán Brady

Yes.

How many calls would that field in an average week?

Mr. Colin Walsh

The call centre is based in Thurles. There are nine people involved and they handle in the region of 200,000 bookings a year. In terms of the narrative around the call centre, there have been calls recently for the sales centre to be closed and for the nine jobs in Tipperary to go. The call centre is an integral part of our commercial infrastructure. While our online transactions, bookings and so on are growing strongly, the nature of our business is that we take the payments up-front. Most of our bookings are group bookings of different sizes. We have bookings with many tour operators as well, so we have to have a team of people at the end of the phone dealing with the people making the bookings. Someone might ring to book a group of five or ten people. They have to get the money from all the people, work out the package they want and the part of the restaurant they want.

The other element of the business that has changed somewhat in recent years is that we try to manage yield and revenue. We manage a mix of sales packages in order that we are maximising the yield and the revenues from the sales mix daily and weekly.

If I ring the centre in Thurles to book a table in the Sportsground in Galway for a Friday night and they say that is not a problem, what do they do then? Do they ring the people in Galway?

Mr. Colin Walsh

They process the information, put it up on the restaurant diary system and the people in Galway can access it online. They will see the booking information. The people who manage the restaurant have the Deputy's booking, the details of his payments and the details of his party online.

Is there a duplication in that respect because the people in Galway are reading the online diary and going off to set the tables or put the seating in place?

Mr. Colin Walsh

There is no duplication. The sales centre is open six days a week and it is handling all the calls across the entire network. The staffing levels in the stadium, in terms of stadium operations, are quite tight. The food and beverage people are not in the stadium during the day, so the possibility of somebody managing the booking in each stadium, relative to the centralised model, is much more inefficient. As set out in one of the commentaries I read, if the sales centre moved to Dublin, we would be looking at increased labour costs, increased rental costs and redundancy costs for the Irish Greyhound Board, IGB.

What is the cost of the call centre in terms of wages for the nine people?

Mr. Colin Walsh

The operating cost of the sales centre in 2016 was €342,000.

Could Mr. Walsh repeat that?

Mr. Colin Walsh

It was €342,000 in 2016. The cost per booking is 65 cent.

Dr. Seán Brady

If I could add one comment about that, the people have been doing phenomenal work for the organisation, particularly in recent months. They are very professional when one rings them. I have booked with them a few times since I joined the organisation. They do fantastic work and, as Mr. Walsh said, it would encourage one to go and better up, so to speak. They do a great selling job.

Mr. Colin Walsh

Part of the development is the implementation of an up-to-date telephone system. That would answer the Deputy's question in terms of calls, rates, etc. Currently, we are working with old technology.

Mr. Michael Murnane

To answer the question, the cost of operating independently out of Thurles in respect of rent and any other charges is €28,000.

Some €12,500 is spent on rent and service charges per year. It is a unit owned by Shannon Development. Part of the remainder is spend on the rental of a broadband line to carry the data traffic in and out of the building. Of the €28,000, the majority is spent on payroll, PRSI, pensions and so on.

That is all for now, Chairman.

Next is Deputy Aylward.

I am sorry, but what is the order?

Deputies Aylward, Burke, Kelly and Connolly.

I will cite an invitation that was given to all greyhound trainers on 17 September 2013. It spelled out what was wrong in the industry four years ago. According to it, people had been witness to the virtual collapse of the Irish greyhound industry in the preceding few years, with a decreasing tote, attendance level and dog pool evident. It asserts that the people administering the industry tried to dismiss the figures and that promises of a bright future appeared to lack credibility. Trainers up and down the country were feeling a financial pinch, it reads, with individual trainers frustrated at the IGB's apparent lack of direction. The reduction in spending on track maintenance was clear for all to see, as were the escalating levels of serious injuries at tracks coupled with malfunctioning equipment. According to the invitation, there appeared to be no transparency or accountability in the IGB as it limped from one crisis to the next. The main issue was the repayment of €25 million in 2016, which was growing closer on the horizon. This invitation shows that breeders and trainers saw these problems in the industry in 2013.

The trainers association held a meeting that night in September. Approximately 80 people attended. However, another meeting was held where 30 professional trainers were brought into a room on their own and the rest were locked out. It was stated at that meeting that the board had offered professional trainers a bonus of €10 for every dog they raced. This meeting appointed a chairman on the night, but no meeting has been held since.

When I asked Dr. Brady at our previous meeting about how important it was to meet stakeholders, he stated that a forum had been set up. However, that forum has not met for six months. This forms part of the problem with the industry. The board is not playing ball with stakeholders and those who matter, namely, the breeders and owners of dogs. It is not bringing stakeholders and people who have concerns along with it. The board seems to be aloof and not playing ball. Will Dr. Brady comment on what I have said?

Dr. Seán Brady

As an outsider with 30 years of senior management experience, I arrived on 4 January of this year. The organisation is down to its skin and bones as a result of the debt burden. It is caught between a rock and a hard place with the threat of insolvency. The IGB should look forward, not back. It is a time for unity, growth and investment in the industry. When the deal is concluded, it will create a new vista for the organisation.

The board does not seem to be bringing stakeholders - breeders and racers - along with it. It is leaving them behind and not negotiating with them. It seems to be aloof in its decisions. The IGB cannot run a good business unless it brings those on whom it depends along with it. The IGB has lost the confidence of breeders and racers in the greyhound industry. That is my personal opinion based on what I have heard in the weeks since we last had the IGB appear before us.

Dr. Seán Brady

Since joining in January, I have met many people in the industry, for example, at the trials in Limerick. I have had different conversations with people. The IGB's commitment is that, within one month of the resumption of racing at Shelbourne Park, a meeting of the forum will be held.

Do the witnesses accept that there is a great deal of unease and unrest in the business? Do they accept that people are angry and do not know in what direction the board is going? Perhaps Mr. Meaney would like to comment.

Mr. Phil Meaney

The industry has been plagued with problems that have needed to be addressed. They were difficult times. I accept that, given the decisions that were made, some people have become disenfranchised. When you decide, you divide, but we had to get the industry back on a good, solid footing. I echo Dr. Brady's remarks. We are effectively court case free and have sorted most of our problems. Our debt at the end of 2015 and start of 2016 was €20.3 million. We are now debt free. Those decisions had to be made.

It is not debt free.

It expects to be debt free when it receives the money.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes.

That is a big "If".

All going to plan, it will be debt free. Maybe in six months time.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Exactly. We can keep looking back, but the problems were not imaginary. Some people in the greyhound business believed that we could magic away the problems. We could not. They were real problems that had to be faced. The board had the opportunity to kick the problems down the road, but it chose - the last few board members who joined in 2015 in particular - to face up to those problems in the belief that doing so would make for a better industry. Deputy Aylward knows that he and I are from the same constituency. I am committed to the greyhound industry. I knew that the problems existed when I joined. I did not join for an easy ride. God knows what I get out of this, but I joined with the belief that we could solve the problems. I accept Deputy Cullinane's point but, on the assumption that the deal goes through, the business will be in a terrific place. If we all stopped talking about what happened in 2005, 2013, 2011 and 2009 and got behind the industry, it could be a great one.

I will press for a comment on the statement that a meeting had been told that the board had offered professional trainers a bonus of €10 for every dog. That would be elitist and a closed shop. Will Mr. Meaney explain that?

Mr. Phil Meaney

I would love to make a comment. Not specifically on that, but in general. I have made this point many times in many forums - it is a splintered industry.

There is no point in telling us that. It is up to the IGB to bring the industry together.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Let me answer the question. They were difficult times for everyone - owners, trainers and breeders. When we had small amounts of money available, we gave certain concessions on occasion to try to keep everything on the road and the industry going. It was from that that we decided to set up a forum so that people might have an input into where the money at our disposal should go, be it to owners, breeders or trainers. I am anxious to get all stakeholders going in the same direction, but that will be very difficult to do.

The forum has not met. Is Mr. Meaney giving a commitment that, from now on, it will meet stakeholders on a more regular basis and keep them informed so that they are brought along with the board?

Mr. Phil Meaney

From the day that I entered the industry, I wanted to get a forum operational. It was virtually impossible, but we got it up and running. We held three meetings last year. As someone mentioned, we held a get together at the end of 2015. A meeting was set for 23 February, plus or minus some days, but the next thing there was a protest in Dublin, so we did not go ahead with the meeting. That was not to make life easier for us. It was just the wrong time to have a meeting. People were uneasy.

Mr. Meaney did not comment on the €10 per dog. Will he explain that?

Mr. Phil Meaney

I know we gave it at some stage. I thought myself the figure was €8. Maybe Deputy Aylward is right.

The figure I have in front of me is €10.

Mr. Phil Meaney

At another stage we gave €15 to the breeder of a litter of pups. Every time a pup won a race, €15 went back to the breeder. There were several small initiatives that we put in over the years. I am certain of the €15 prize and it is still in place. There was €10 for the trainer.

Was that open to everyone or was it a closed shop for certain elite breeders? Was it open to everyone?

Mr. Phil Meaney

No, it is for everyone who wins a race, from an S10 sprint, which is the worst or poorest race on the calendar, to the derby. The breeder of the winner gets €15 paid by IGB into his account.

Again, it is not elitist. A trainer has to train 100 dogs. Once he trains 100 runners, as opposed to winners, then whether the person is an owner, trainer, private trainer or public trainer, that person gets the award. I do not in any way agree with the Deputy that there was anything untoward about it. It was a small attempt by the board in difficult times when we were murdered with debt-----

What money was put into that scheme?

Mr. Michael Murnane

The figure is €134,000. What the Deputy is referring to started at €10, it went down to €8 and it is open to everyone at this stage. Therefore, the word "elitism" can be taken off the vocabulary now.

I want to move on.

Mr. Pat Creed

I want to clarify something.

My time is short.

Let Mr. Creed in, Deputy. I will give you time.

Mr. Pat Creed

This board started in December 2015. We had our first meeting in Horse and Jockey in December 2015. We met early in January and we went through the challenges facing the board. We had the High Court cases that had to be resolved. We had the defined benefit pension scheme. We had massive bank debts that needed to be sorted. We had some issues around needing a laboratory machine.

In early 2016, we went to Limerick and met every constituent of the greyhound industry for the entire day. The trainers and owners and so on came in. We met them all for the whole day. It was one full day. I am keen to refute the fact that we are not talking to people. We had three consultative forums during 2016. The last was attended by the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Andrew Doyle. We have met the industry on a consultative basis right through 2016.

What came out of the fora? What response did the fora draw out? Did anything come of them?

Mr. Pat Creed

Off the top of my head, one outcome was the sales event in Shelbourne Park last June. That came out of the consultative forum. We agreed to have a sales event in Shelbourne Park. It was a major success. Many dogs were sold for big money. It was a great boost for the industry. I hope the problem is gone now, but some people seem to be saying "if". The problem is that with the debt gone, we can now look at rewarding the people who are keeping this industry going, including the owners, breeders and trainers. We will have substantial funds to do that in the current year.

I will come to that. I could not let it go without saying something about Harold's Cross. It is closed and locked up at the moment. A dispute has arisen. Bord na gCon is losing €30,000 per week according to the documents I have before me. That is a great deal of money. Has any progress been made on that? In hindsight, would it have been better to do it differently? The sale to the Department of Education and Skills of Harold's Cross might not go through for five or six months. Would Bord na gCon not have been better off to have left open the gates of Harold's Cross? It was one of the top three earners in the country. Would it not have been better to keep in going and keep people happy and then have the sale and close it, rather than the way the board did it, which was by stealth?

Dr. Seán Brady

As I said earlier, we met Allied Irish Banks on day nine when I was in the job. AIB told us that if we did not sell the site, then the bank would sell it. That informed the decision. The sale of Harold's Cross also formed part of the strategic plan for 2017. The sale of Harold's Cross and getting it ready for sale was absolutely fundamental to the future of the industry.

Could the board have sold it on to AIB while keeping it going until the sale went through? In that way the board would have had money flowing in from it. That would have kept people happier rather than the way it was handled.

Dr. Seán Brady

The property advice I received on the matter was that to get full price for the property we needed vacant possession. That informed the decision. We faced a choice: either we could sell Harold's Cross or go insolvent.

What kind of money was Harold's Cross turning over before it was closed? It was profitable anyway, was it not?

Dr. Seán Brady

Mr. Walsh will help the committee with that.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Harold's Cross was returning a profit more recently of in the region of €300,000 in a year.

The profit was €300,000.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Yes, that was the profit. However, that has to be compared to Shelbourne Park. Shelbourne Park was returning profits of €1 million per annum.

Mr. Phil Meaney

I want to make one point. It has been a difficult period with the two tracks in Dublin. At this stage, many people have forgotten the sequence of events, how Shelbourne Park came to be closed and how Harold's Cross came to be closed. Again, rather than going into that in any detail, I would like if we did not go there and that we could move on with the Dublin people. I have said from the word "Go" that Harold's Cross is sold. We had to do that to get rid of our debt. We have some of them here today. I am issuing an open invitation on behalf of the industry. We want those people back in Shelbourne Park.

Has there been any movement since the Bord na gCon representatives were here last on peace talks?

Mr. Phil Meaney

There has, but, if the Deputy will forgive me, I will ask him to leave it at that.

There has been movement. Is that correct?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes. We have Kieran Mulvey as a mediator. There has been movement but we are not there yet.

I want to talk about the Tote returns. A total of €50 million was put in by 2015 and that went down to €20 million in the Tote. The figure for Horse Racing Ireland went from €50 million up to €80 million in the same time with the recession and everything included. Can the deputation explain why? The Tote is a major money spinner for the Irish Greyhound Board. Why did the figure go from €50 million to €20 million? What were the reasons? The figure for Horse Racing Ireland went from €50 million to €80 million. Why is that? Can the deputation explain why the Tote went so badly for the Irish Greyhound Board? In the same period when Horse Racing Ireland went up, the greyhound board went down immensely.

Mr. Colin Walsh

Let us consider the figures published in the annual reports for HRI and IGB. In 2007, IGB on-track Tote sales were €48.3 million. The figure for HRI was €36.8 million. In 2016, the figures are €16.2 million and €11.8 for IGB and HRI, respectively. The figures I quoted the last day included the 67.9% reduction in Tote revenues at domestic horse tracks and the 66% decline in greyhound tracks.

The figures for Horse Racing Ireland have come back up.

Mr. Colin Walsh

The Horse Racing Ireland on-track Tote remains under pressure, as does ours. The gap between the two has widened somewhat. Horse Racing Ireland has an advantage. It has more markets open to it to sell its Tote product internationally than we do. Horse Racing Ireland is doing a fantastic job of generating revenues in those markets.

I wish to ask Mr. Gleeson a question. What way is the money divided? It seems 80% of the fund goes to Horse Racing Ireland and 20% goes to the Irish Greyhound Board. Can Mr. Gleeson explain why it is 80:20 and why it is not more evenly divided, perhaps 40:60 or 50:50? Why is it 20:80? I want to know the reason and how the Department has come at that.

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

I cannot explain it, but it is in the 1958 Act, as amended. That is the breakdown in the Act. It has been there as long as I remember. I presume a policy decision was made on the basis of the relative sizes of the industries. Anyway, it is a statutory provision.

It has never been looked at or changed since. The split was 20:80 always. Is that correct?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

It has been that way for as long as I have known of it. If there is a proposal to change it, it would require a change in the primary Act. That could be done, but that is a policy question.

Did the Irish Greyhound Board ever look for an increase, percentage wise, from that fund?

Mr. Phil Meaney

No, we have accepted the 80%. As Mr. Gleeson has said, it is covered by statute. It is split on the basis of 80:20.

Does Bord na gCon accept that?

Mr. Phil Meaney

We have accepted it, yes. A certain amount of it is based on employment. More people are employed in the horse industry than in the greyhound industry.

In 2015 the Irish Greyhound Board received €13.6 million from this fund, an increase of €2.85 million from 2014.

However, the board reduced the prize money by €800,000 instead of increasing it. Why was that? It got more money but the witnesses will only come back and tell me the same story again, that it was caused by debt servicing. However, the board was hitting the people who wanted it most and the people it depends on to keep the industry going.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Prize money was not increased in 2015, as the Deputy has said. It was increased subsequently.

It was reduced by €800,000 according to the figures I have.

Mr. Michael Murnane

When 2014 and 2015 are compared.

That is what I have.

Mr. Michael Murnane

In 2013, the board increased prize money by approximately 20%. This increase did not result in any extra commercial return for the IGB and was turning out to be less affordable to the IGB. During 2014 it was getting very obvious we would face a substantial loss if something was not done to try to restore prize money back to 2013 levels. The reduced prize money remained into 2015, until the board increased it in 2016 by 20%, which was an increase of €1.2 million. It was increased in 2016.

I have figures that in 2014 the board received €10.8 million funding, of which it paid €5.3 million in prize money, which is 49% of the money going to prize money. In 2015 it received €13.6 million funding and paid €4.5 million in prize money, which is 33% of the funding going to prize money. There is a big reduction even though the IGB got more money. There were expenses increases of €1.6 million in 2015 as against 2014. We went through this previously and it includes legal, regulation and marketing. However the prize money has a surplus of €2.3 million. Why did this extra money not go to prize money?

Mr. Michael Murnane

The simple fact of the matter, which we mentioned here, is Bord na gCon has to generate a surplus to repay the bank. There is interest to be paid of €500,000 and the bank had to be repaid some element of capital, which was €750,000.

The problem is the bank debt had to be serviced, and the people depending on the industry had to suffer over it. It came off of their backs.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Effectively, that is the message.

It is a simple as that.

Mr. Michael Murnane

It is as simple as that.

Can I ask, now that we are-----

Mr. Michael Murnane

There is another matter. When I joined the board the overdraft had to be secured because we needed the cash to survive. The bank imposed an upper limit on prize money of €5.7 million. Even if the board was to win the lottery the bank would not allow us to increase prize money beyond that €5.7 million.

For the future, when this burden is off the board's back, will it increase prize money back to €10.5 million? There is a problem at present and a strike. If the prize money was increased, and the board got back into the system the people it wants to return, which the board can do by giving prize money, it would sort out the problems it has, and it would also solve the problem at Harold's Cross faster by doing this.

Mr. Phil Meaney

The Deputy is right. It costs us approximately €1.3 million to service the debt between capital repayments and interest repayments. While we have to be careful until we get all our ducks lined up, we absolutely intend to increase substantially the prize money.

To save the greyhound business. Is that what Mr. Meaney is saying?

Mr. Phil Meaney

In any business, before something can be got moving in the right direction the debt has to be sorted out. That has been our problem. It has been our Achilles heel for the past four or five years. It is a huge debt.

I want to ask about the Indecon report, which I will direct at Mr. Gleeson. Aidan O'Driscoll stated at a meeting of this committee in February that the IGB raised quite a bit of income. My understanding is that recent years have been more successful in raising funds through the operation of the food and beverage offering at race tracks. Have the Secretary General and the Department looked at IGB's accounts for recent years? This is coming back to what we asked about with regard to oversight and making sure everything is above board. At one stage, a representative of the Department was on the board. Why was this discontinued? Why is the Department not a member of this board about which there is all the controversy? Should the Department have a representative on it, and oversight by someone from the Department?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

To take the second question first, the appointment of members of the board is a matter for the Minister. The Minister is at liberty to appoint a civil servant to the board if he or she wishes to do so.

Does Mr. Gleeson think it would be a good idea to have a member from the Department?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

The Deputy is asking me a policy question.

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

I will not give an opinion.

Would it be preferable when there is so much money? We are speaking about €14 million being given in the coming year to the IGB. Would it not be right and proper to have someone from the Department on the board to ensure the board is spending the money properly and can report directly back to the Department? Mr. Gleeson said he meets the IGB only once a year. Only for the Comptroller and Auditor General no one would know what was going on. Only for the fact he presents it here to us we would never know what was going on with regard to oversight and proper management. It would be a good idea to put someone from the Department on the board. That is why I am asking the question.

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

The Deputy is asking me for a view on a policy matter.

It is for the Minister.

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

I am happy to say what I think the advantages and disadvantages might be, and people can take their own view and make their own decisions. The advantage might be what the Deputy has said, which is that somebody is on the board having closer oversight. The disadvantage might be that it might be perceived as a conflict of interest that someone is in an oversight position from a departmental point of view and on the board. These are the issues.

How would it be a conflict of interest when €14.5 million of taxpayers' money is being spent? The person would be there to make sure it is being spent properly.

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

I am not arguing for or against it. I am just saying the perception might be that if someone is party to a board decision it would be difficult to sit in the Department and make judgments about it. These are the advantages and disadvantages. The decision is a policy decision.

It is the Minister's decision.

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

Ministers are at liberty to appoint civil servants if they wish to do so.

Is Mr. Gleeson happy with the oversight at present? Is he happy that everything is okay and above board, or does he think there should be more scrutiny?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

There is quite a bit of scrutiny, and I know I said I met it once a year. There is quite a bit of scrutiny from a departmental point of view. There is very regular engagement with it. There are two formal governance meetings every year. There is a letter of assurance from the board. There are conditions and parameters attached to the issue of funding to it every year. This year, we have insisted it provides a revised statement of strategy for the next five years as a condition of getting the funding.

When did the Department do that?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

In January. There are arrangements in place. We have just finalised a formal written arrangement for all of our State agencies, which has just been cleared by the Secretary General and management board. The template has gone out, or is going out, to all of our State agencies. It will provide for a formalised written agreement between the Secretary General and the chairmen and chief executives of state Agencies. It would be better if we had had it in place before now, but that document is on the point of being issued. It has been approved internally.

I will move on.

I have one more question. Now that the debt monkey is off the back of the IGB, how does it intend to invest in stadiums and tracks throughout the country? Does it have a priority list? I am speaking about Kilkenny, Waterford and Clonmel in my area. Is there a priority list? How does it intend to progress upgrading all of these tracks?

Dr. Seán Brady

Certainly two that will be upgraded are Shelbourne Park, which needs a significant boost-----

I hope the IGB does not do what it did in Limerick.

Dr. Seán Brady

It is not proposed to build a new stadium. It is proposed to refresh Shelbourne Park. We believe Cork needs some improvement. This is work that needs to be done. These are two gaping holes in the infrastructure at present.

What about the smaller stadium and tracks?

Dr. Seán Brady

When racing is resumed in Shelbourne obviously it is a matter on which we will take a view. My inclination is we do not have the money yet. This deal is not done. As Mr. Gleeson said, a strategic plan is due to be presented to the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine to approve the strategic direction going forward. This process has just started. When it is finished it will be sent to the Department for its consideration and, hopefully, approval.

Is the IGB giving a commitment for 2017 that when the debt is gone prize money will increase back to approximately €10 million?

Mr. Phil Meaney

We will give a commitment that prize money will go back up but we are not in a position-----

I know Mr. Meaney is not going to give exact figures.

Mr. Phil Meaney

As Dr. Brady said, we must update stadia because we have not had the money. We need a bit of money for IT and possibly marketing. We will have a plan before the end of the year.

I will be very brief. I thank the witnesses because I know it is a very long day. In respect of the Indecon report and the projected savings over 20 years, the first item that was suggested concerned the renting of the existing sales centre in Thurles. I think it cost €25,000 per annum. What is the reasoning behind that? Why are we renting an office independently of headquarters to sell tickets?

Mr. Michael Murnane

As I mentioned earlier, the sales centre rent is €12,000. A lease broadband line costs €12,000 bringing it up to €25,000. Relocating from Thurles would involve a fairly significant outlay in redundancy as staff may not wish to travel and would be entitled to redundancy so it would not be affordable and it would be questionable as to whether value for money would be achieved if that decision were taken.

When was it opened?

Mr. Michael Murnane

It was opened in 2007.

What was the logic behind that decision?

Mr. Michael Murnane

My understanding of the logic behind it was that there were reservation agents in Dublin, Cork or other locations who were effectively doing the same job. Advances in technology meant that we could centralise that in one location. There were a number of independent agents before 2007. The catering was outsourced at that stage so it was their personnel who were taking the bookings of Irish Greyhound Board so it was a case of centralising bookings in the sales centre in Thurles.

Is it owned by a private citizen? To whom is the rent being paid?

Mr. Michael Murnane

Shannon Development. It is a Shannon Development site.

Projected savings over the next 20 years come to €2.2 million but the IGB has not dealt with that yet.

Mr. Michael Murnane

We have not dealt with it but, as I said earlier, dealing with that would involve significant outlay in redundancy and a significant loss of skills from the people in Thurles, some of whom have been there since 2007. The centre is operating very well, as Mr. Walsh mentioned earlier.

There are other items that make up the €2.2 million, such as manpower savings, the running costs of Henry Street and IT costs at the sales centre. They have yet to be tackled.

Mr. Michael Murnane

IT is part of the figure of €25,000. Henry Street is gone. It was sold in 2014 or 2015. We are consistently looking at manpower savings. When the track accounts for 2016 come out, members will see savings in payroll over 2015.

We really need to work hard on that. We are all stakeholders involved in the National Greyhound Consultative Forum. There have been reports that bookmakers were not involved in that. Is that correct?

Mr. Phil Meaney

The Deputy is correct. Bookmakers were not invited but we can certainly extend it to include them.

Was there any reasoning behind that?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Absolutely none.

In respect of the different entities Dr. Brady was part of and worked in and the governance structures he experienced in other entities, how do they compare with the IGB?

Dr. Seán Brady

I spent a lot of my career in publicly limited companies. I would consider the governance structures in those businesses to be quite good. The Indecon report said that improvement was needed in governance in the IGB. Some improvements have been made and further improvements are needed to make it better.

When Dr. Brady assumed the post of interim CEO, was he shocked by the governance in Bord na gCon because we were shocked in respect of accounts being late, protocols not being followed, the board not being freshened and the fact there was nobody with marketing experience on the board?

Dr. Seán Brady

"Shocked" is not a word I would use but the-----

Dr. Seán Brady

I was surprised by some aspects. As Mr. Creed said, there are a lot of board meetings. I worked in Greencore which had four times the turnover of the IGB. At that time, it had six board meetings per annum so we tend to have a lot of board meetings. They are also longer than I would expect.

Dr Brady would not hold it out as an example of good corporate governance?

Dr. Seán Brady

Reading the Indecon report, I see that improvements have been made. I believe that some further improvements could be made in governance.

At what pace are they happening? Is it a very slow process? Time has passed since the Indecon report. I know the current board is not responsible for everything, but poor judgment has been exercised and we have seen many examples of that. Even outside the legislative requirements relating to the board, is Dr. Brady satisfied with the pace at which these reforms have been introduced?

Dr. Seán Brady

I am in my fifth month. We have seen the Harold's Cross impasse and got Shelbourne Park back up. I am not spending many nights every week thinking about governance in the IGB. Obviously, every organisation could be better, but that is not an area that I have spent a lot of time on.

Is that not one of Dr. Brady's key responsibilities? A CEO must ensure the entity is responding to change and that governance within it is robust. I imagine Dr. Brady will flag those issues through the proper channels.

Dr. Seán Brady

Yes, I would have already flagged one or two. I am interim CEO so I am not going to change the world overnight.

Even as interim CEO, Dr. Brady still has responsibility. The organisation is on his shoulders as CEO. I appeal for work to be fast tracked because I gather there are huge concerns, even from Dr. Brady's contribution, regarding governance structures. It is obviously a watershed moment for this industry and a big statement is needed to bring the industry back on to a sustainable path.

Dr. Seán Brady

In businesses where I previously worked, the board set the strategy and the executive executed it, delivered and were judged on the performance of that. When there are a lot of board meetings, it is challenging for the executive to create space to carry out the executive functions.

Let us start off on a lighter note. I know the witnesses have been here for a long time, but if it is any solace to them, another thing was happening relating to a certain leadership race. I am not sure how many eyes are on us today, so the witnesses might be lucky in that sense. I jest.

In 2007, prize money stood at €12.23 million. In 2015, it had declined to €6.67 million, which is a substantial change. In total, in terms of prize money, €30 million was taken out of the industry between 2007 and 2015. Prize money is what makes the industry tick so I genuinely welcome Dr. Brady's comment that it will be increased. I hope all of us have one thing in common, namely, a wish to see the industry survive and thrive.

A proposal was made to renominate Mr. Neilan who had delivered €21.08 million in operating surpluses between 2007 and 2011. We keep seeing the surpluses but really it is just the fund going in one door and partially coming out the other. Ultimately, taxpayers' money is going in one side and coming out the other. In the meantime, a large number of salaries have to be paid and prize money is declining sharply. Prize money is the reason the industry will thrive but it is going south. There is an operating profit, however. As Dr. Brady stated, the operating profit is there because Bord na gCon has to repay its debts and so forth. My impression is of an industry in crisis. We heard in evidence that prize money increased before being reduced again. However, the fact that it is tumbling shows the extent of the crisis.

I will ask some quick-fire questions. From a commercial point of view, was it not crazy to close Harold's Cross stadium on the date chosen? Was it not madness to close the gate on the night in question when St. Valentine's night was approaching, bookings had been made and a large meeting was planned?

Dr. Seán Brady

I disagree with the Deputy. The challenge this business faced in January was the debt and the debt had to be done. If the debt is not dealt with, the business is insolvent and there will be no industry.

We will come back to that issue. The previous chief executive officer was asked to resign or resigned. Was a compensation package provided and, if so, was it substantial?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Regarding the previous CEO, it was by mutual agreement. She departed on 31 December just-----

Her departure was by mutual agreement.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes, absolutely. We paid out her contract. Her contract expired on 30 June 2017 and we paid her her contract.

How much did it cost?

Mr. Phil Meaney

It cost about €115,000.

Mr. Michael Murnane

That will be disclosed. It has to be disclosed in the 2016 annual report because it is a CEO's salary.

The total cost was €116,000.

Mr. Phil Meaney

We paid her salary and pension entitlements.

Why did she leave?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Geraldine Larkin came in in 2014. We had regulatory and legal problems - lots of problems - and her skill sets we felt were ideal for where we were. A lot of progress was made over the next couple of years. Deputy Burke referred to the board not being freshened up. That is not true. Two new board members were appointed - those two gentlemen - so the board was freshened up. Again-----

Was Ms Larkin's departure a loss? Were the witnesses disappointed she left?

Mr. Phil Meaney

She was very good when she was there but the focus now is changing. The debt had to be dealt with. The turning point was that we decided we would advertise the position, as was part of the contract. We just wanted to see what was out there in the context that we hope we are a bit further down the road now with the sale of Harold's Cross. We were becoming very focused-----

Would Mr. Meaney have preferred if Ms Larkin had stayed? That is not a trick question. A "Yes" or "No" answer will suffice.

Mr. Phil Meaney

It is kind of like the question "Do you still beat your wife?"

No, it is not.

Mr. Gerry Greally

I was part of the decision making process at the time.

All I want is clarity.

As the individual in question is not here, I do not want anyone to make any remarks that could in any way impact on her good name.

Nor do I. All I want to know is whether the witnesses would prefer if she had stayed in place?

Members and witnesses must be very careful because the person is not here.

Mr. Frank Nyhan

In fairness to Ms Larkin, her position became untenable once we decided we were advertising the position of chief executive. It was in that context that a discussion took place as to what she wanted to do. That is when the mutual agreement arose.

That clarifies the matter.

It was just a quick question. On 4 May, Mr. Gleeson stated: "The reality is that between 2014 and now, there has been a roadmap outlined for the development of the sector and its preservation, to be frank, and that has been the Indecon report." The Indecon report is titled, Review of Certain Matters Relating to Bord na gCon. The reason the words "certain matters" are used is that it is not complete. How can the report be a roadmap if it does not deal with a whole range of other issues?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

What Indecon did was look at a whole range of issues, including business development, including the coming on stream of new products like commingling, including finance, including online platforms. All of those issues were covered in the Indecon report. The proposition of Indecon, and it seems to me it has been borne out by experience, is that even with this new business development platform, they were not going to generate sufficient margins to close off the debt. Indecon recommended that these avenues be pursued but it also said in addition to that-----

The report is not a comprehensive plan. It refers to "certain matters".

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

No, and there was certainly a revised business plan submitted in May 2015. Indecon identified the elephant in the room, if one likes. It did not ignore the other business generating possibilities but there certainly has been a focus on the implementation of the Indecon report. People have already referred to governance and regulation. Those issues were all dealt with in Indecon and we have engaged in a process with the board to make sure it is delivering on its commitments.

The Indecon report, in the executive summary, states: "Indecon considers that it will be necessary for the Board of Directors as well as for the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine to monitor performance closely in 2014." Turnover subsequently dropped by €5 million. Was performance not being monitored?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

Monitoring performance does not mean it will improve. We were monitoring performance. I said to the Deputy before that we were not happy with the performance and that is clear. I am sure the board is not happy with that performance either. However, in a way, it is a demonstration of the difficulty that the industry was in and it substantiates the Indecon proposition, which was that just delivering on these business development objectives without looking at the more fundamental debt would not be enough.

The former board member, Mr. Brendan Moore, wrote to the Department when he resigned. Did the Department not take cognisance of what he said when he resigned or was it not concerned by it?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

We were concerned.

What did the Department do?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

We did a number of things. We commissioned Indecon. Mr. Moore was concerned about governance and regulation and the finances------

Was the Department very concerned by what he said?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

Of course we were, but we knew many of these things already and we were acting upon them. In so far as the issue of the semen from dead dogs was concerned, it was the non-application of regulations since 2005. It was quite an intractable situation so what we said was, "Look, this rule has to be either changed or implemented." At the time, the decision was to change the regulations. That could not be done retrospectively. We did take a number of steps on foot of what Mr. Moore said.

The Department was suitably concerned. It had known about some of the issues previously and was acting on them, yet the industry has gone south since.

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

The fact is that there is a €20 million debt overhanging this industry. It went through a recession, which affected it badly, and the business development plans proposed were not sufficient on their own to improve the performance of the industry. The issues people talk about here such as prize money, the development of stadia and the market effort require funding to deliver and the overhanging debt has been a substantial issue, a preventer of progress.

I appreciate that Mr. Gleeson takes an interest in this but based on my engagement with his Secretary General and others, the greyhound industry is not a priority in any way for the Department. I hope that will change. I do not see its hands all over this.

While it was not the Department's decision to make, it surely had an opinion on it. Did Mr. Gleeson agree with the fact that the board made this decision without consultation with the directors of Harold's Cross or having a vote?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

As far I was concerned, it was for the board to make decisions about the opening or closure of its own stadia. It had not occurred to me-----

From a corporate governance point of view, does Mr. Gleeson think it was correct that the Harold's Cross board was not even consulted?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

I am not sure whether it was correct or not. The chief executive officer has said if he did it again, he would do it differently and it probably would have been better to do it that way.

Does Dr. Brady concur with that?

Dr. Seán Brady

I will add a comment if that is permissible.

Absolutely.

Dr. Seán Brady

There were two specific steps in the process around Harold's Cross. The first was the decision of Bord na gCon to cease racing at the stadium. The next step, which was appropriate governance then, was the decision to ready the stadium for sale. That was a matter for the Harold's Cross board. It met and considered the matter, and approved that approach.

I refer to a report in the Irish Examiner on 6 August 2013 after Mr. Moore resigned, which mentioned that it was regrettable and he had a lack of awareness of operations. Did Mr. Meaney raise his concerns internally?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Obviously, no chairman wants a board member to resign. It was his decision. The other six board members did not feel the same as Mr. Moore. I certainly regretted that he tendered his resignation.

The statement in the report is attributable to the board and not to an individual:

It is regrettable. We reasonably expected that he would have regarded the board of IGB as the correct forum to raise these issues in the first instance. Had they been raised, his lack of awareness of the current operations of IGB might have been addressed and the damage to the organisation avoided.

The board referred to "lack of awareness", yet the Department says it took what he said seriously. Was that statement a little harsh?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes, I-----

That is fine. I just wanted a "Yes" or "No" answer. It probably was a little in hindsight. I will not put words in Mr. Meaney's mouth.

With regard to the 2015 accounts, approximately €1.84 million was spent on racing regulation, laboratory integrity and governance. That is good in one way because the industry needs to be regulated but it is also concerning because I am wondering what is the necessity for this. With regard to drug testing, was there any difference in the report that, unfortunately, ended up online and was then removed before being put back up?

Mr. Michael Murnane

None whatsoever.

The control committee assesses races. How many races have not been paid out since 2015 because of concerns raised by the committee?

Mr. Michael Murnane

None that I am aware of in 2015. There might be some for 2016 but it is small.

Will the board provide a list of races that have not appeared in the reports? I would also like to know why they do not appear in the reports. I will not go through them because there are many.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Is the Deputy talking about races in 2015 for which prize money was not paid out?

Mr. Michael Murnane

That is fine, and the same for 2016?

Yes. It is concerning that a number of these are among the biggest races. I want to be sure the board's checks and balances are working and that the prize money has been paid out to the winners of these races. Does Mr. Murnane know off the top of his head of races for which the prize money has not been paid?

Mr. Michael Murnane

There is one race. The last big race in Limerick did not pay out until two weeks ago but it has been paid.

I am not trying to catch Mr. Murnane. If there are outstanding races, can he provide a list?

Mr. Michael Murnane

There might be small ones but, as regards the Deputy's request, we will confirm that.

Dr. Seán Brady

I will add some information which I have received from our regulation manager. Adverse analytical findings are published on the website and control committee decisions are also published. We will answer the Deputy's question in detail.

I want to make sure all the prize money has been paid and I would like to know why certain races are not appearing on the website.

Who is conducting the organisational review?

Dr. Seán Brady

Preferred Results.

Was that tendered for?

Dr. Seán Brady

Yes.

Were all contracts that IGB has entered into over the past few years tendered for appropriately?

Mr. Michael Murnane

Yes.

All the witnesses will accept legal costs are seismic. The board has had to defend many cases. Were any of these individual cases?

Mr. Michael Murnane

One principal case was settled in 2015. There were three separate matters and three separate plaintiffs against the IGB. It was settled in October 2015.

I do not want details. Was this an individual case and the board felt it was necessary to defend it?

Mr. Michael Murnane

The case was ongoing since 2010.

However, the board felt it necessary to defend it and settle it. What was the total cost?

Mr. Michael Murnane

The total cost of the case, including IGB costs, in 2015 was €793,000.

Is that not an incredible cost?

Mr. Michael Murnane

It was a High Court case and that includes counsel fees and solicitor fees. I am an accountant, not a solicitor. The legal system is quite expensive.

That is concerning. I will seek help from Mr. Creed who is the person with financial experience on the board. He was probably appointed for that reason. Is the pension fund for IGB employees in serious deficit?

Mr. Pat Creed

Mr. Murnane is better placed to answer that question.

Mr. Michael Murnane

It was in serious deficit. When I joined the board in 2012, it was a deficit that was-----

How long did the deficit exist before the staff were informed?

Mr. Michael Murnane

The staff were consistently informed through the trustee. It is my information that the trustee was engaging with the IGB to see if funds could be found to try to address the significant liability

Not to repeat ourselves, during 2012, 2013, 2014, there was a situation with the horse and greyhound fund. It was consistently in decline. The income from racing activities was also weak and spare resources were not available to address the scheme. The scheme was in such decline that it was not a case of a chip around the corners, but it needed some serious surgery to try to address the liability.

The CEO issued staff a notice on 8 March advising them to go to a meeting about this and to have their submissions in before the meeting on the 14 March, so there was less than six days. This is a big issue. We all have to look after our pensions. We all have to think about the future and our loved ones. This is a big issue. Was this not was very little time to give to them?

Mr. Michael Murnane

What the Deputy refers to there is a section 50 process.

Mr. Michael Murnane

In a section 50 process, the manner of communication is the responsibility of the trustee because they are responsible for all members of the scheme, both active members who are employees of the IGB but also former members, the deferred members, the pensioners. The trustee had written to all members one month in advance, asking for their consultation in the process.

Is Mr. Murnane happy with the consultation process that has been ongoing? Does he think the staff are happy with it?

Mr. Michael Murnane

To be human about it, I think staff are still disgruntled over some of the decisions that had to be taken to try to survive.

Did they sign up to this?

Mr. Michael Murnane

Every member of staff was advised of the-----

But they did not agree to it.

Mr. Michael Murnane

The staff made their position clear in June that they wanted various options in the scheme. They wanted the scheme up to 2020-2021. The board was of the opinion that it wanted the position resolved in the term of this board and to close in 2018-2019.

So the board drove on despite the fact that the workers were completely against this.

Mr. Michael Murnane

All workers were written to and advised of the pension decision.

Does Mr. Murnane feel that it met its requirements under section 50, which is very specific about the consultative process it has with workers?

Mr. Michael Murnane

As I said, the section 50 process is a matter for the trustee to handle and manage. I know he followed it diligently with the advisers on board and they were fully satisfied.

What period of time was there no CFO in the organisation?

Mr. Michael Murnane

Mid-2008 until February 2012.

So four years.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Yes, just under four years.

How was that allowed to happen, Mr. Gleeson?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

I do not know. It was an issue referred to in the Indecon report and it clearly was not acceptable. There is a CFO now and there has been since 2012.

Let us be frank, it was bananas that there was no CFO. It is crazy stuff. We have a situation where the pension was going down the tubes and there was no CFO in the organisation. Sorry, but there is a duty of care issue with regard to the workers here. I am not asking Mr. Gleeson to comment, I am giving my opinion. That is incredible stuff. Many of the workers were obviously working hard and they deserve respect.

The Department gave €1.3 million for the pension scheme deficit, is that correct?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

I am not sure that was the case. A proposal was put forward which had to be cleared by the pensions board. The Department increased its contribution to the organisation from the horse and greyhound fund year-on-year since 2013, I think.

Was part of that to do with the pension?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

As I understand, this was going to cost €800,000 per annum.

That is the figure I have.

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

Correct, up to 2023, to cover the cost of the deficit. We asked that €800,000 be put into the pension fund from that.

How much did it put in?

Mr. Brendan Gleeson

In the first year, there may have been a timing issue and a smaller sum may have been put in, but it is €800,000 a year, as I understand it now.

Did the €800,000 go in?

Mr. Michael Murnane

The €800,000 did but Mr. Gleeson is correct, there was €450,000 put in in 2015, followed by €300,000 in 2016. There was a further €300,000 put in. There is more money due in June 2017, when we sit down and discuss the next stage of the payments.

Have you met the full requirement? How long is it going to take to deal with this issue?

Mr. Michael Murnane

It is a phased process until 2023.

And you are going to honour it?

Mr. Michael Murnane

We are a year in and we are on target, yes. The only thing I can say to members of the scheme is that the funding of the scheme is not dependent on any aggressive asset realisation. It is very much a cash-based scheme.

Will any of the proposed sale, that €23 million, be used to to deal with the pension fund, considering the concerns of the staff?

Mr. Michael Murnane

Not initially because this is a scheme that was restructured last year.

The differential between what was there in the public scheme and the new scheme is, on average, 18%. The staff have to go on to this now because you signed that in December 2015, was it?

Mr. Michael Murnane

The section 50?

Mr. Michael Murnane

It was September 2016.

Sorry, September 2016. We are all mithered. Apologies, I knew that. Does that include all of management?

Mr. Michael Murnane

No member of management or the executive is on the defined benefit scheme.

What scheme are they on?

Mr. Michael Murnane

They are on a defined contribution scheme, a DC scheme.

So there are two different schemes.

Mr. Michael Murnane

There are two different schemes, yes. There is a defined benefit scheme-----

Mr. Michael Murnane

-----and there is a defined contribution scheme.

I know the changes that have been made but were there any changes made to the scheme that management is on?

Mr. Michael Murnane

No.

Mr. Michael Murnane

A defined contribution scheme is a scheme that is individual to each person's requirements.

So the board did not feel there was any necessity to change anything.

Mr. Michael Murnane

That scheme was honoured in respect of the contract entered into which each-----

I will say what I am going to do, with the permission of the Chair. I have lots of detailed questions and I do not want to take up the time because I have one big whopper of a question at the end here.

I have to speak in the Chamber at 5 p.m.

I am concluding now.

What I was going to suggest was that Deputy Kelly, as Vice Chairman, could take the chair.

They will love that.

I will only be gone for 20 minutes. I will ask Deputy Kelly to chair in five minutes because Deputy Connolly is next and I can come back.

I will have specific questions on the pension. What I will do, through the Chair, through the committee, is forward them on instead of taking up any more time because they are detailed questions.

This is my last question, the witnesses will be pleased to know. I was very taken by Mr. Meaney said earlier on his passion for the greyhound industry, which I accept. I accept everyone's bona fides on their passion for the greyhound industry, including everyone in the Gallery, the witnesses - everyone. As I said at the beginning of this process a few weeks ago, I have no agenda here except what is best. He said he is totally committed to the industry, and in fairness, he did issue an invitation - he said he wants the industry to get back, for everyone to engage, co-operate and to see Shelbourne Park open in the future. We talked before about issues which I saw in the Horse and Jockey which was incredible. There is obviously no confidence and I have expressed my own view in relation to that. We know that Dr. Brady is an interim CEO and that issue will be dealt with in the future - I presume he does not want to stay in this job forever - so that will change. We acknowledge his love for the industry, but if it came to it that as part of this process the result was that Shelbourne Park did not open again, if that meant the industry getting back going in the right direction, does he feel if he moved aside and facilitated that, it would be the right thing to do? I am not trying to make this personal, because none of this is personal, but if that would facilitate the industry re-engaging, Shelbourne Park opening and everything, would he be willing to do that?

Mr. Frank Nyhan

Before our Chairman answers that, this board acts collectively. Our board acts collectively and I do not think that it is fair to try to isolate the chairman in a question.

That is Mr. Nyhan's point and for him to say. The chairman can decide if he wishes to answer the question, if he does not that is fine. If the board wishes to answer it collectively, rather than an individual response, that is also fine. I will leave it up to themselves. Is that fair enough?

On behalf of the board. In fairness, we did not expect anyone to be asked to make a personal statement about his or her personal circumstances.

I am sorry, Chairman. I am quite happy to change it to the board.

Fine. Rather than personalising it, it is a question for the board.

Mr. Phil Meaney

First and foremost, I am very disappointed that Deputy Alan Kelly singled me out.

I have made my point.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Excuse me-----

It can be the board.

Through the Chair, please.

Mr. Phil Meaney

That was the Deputy's second option. His first was to ask whether I should stand aside. I will be brief and not delay the meeting. I joined in 2011 when a sum of €2.5 million was due to Dundalk. There were pension and legal problems and a large debt. If Deputy Alan Kelly is asking whether I will stand aside, why would I on the assumption that the deal will go through?

I am only asking the question. It is up to Mr. Meaney to decide whether he wants to answer it.

He has answered it.

It is up to him to decide.

I ask the Deputy to take the Chair.

Just give me 30 seconds.

I hate to go back over Mr. Meaney's comment about whether someone is still beating his wife. We make comments - I have been known to do so - but that one was particularly unacceptable.

Mr. Phil Meaney

I withdraw it unreservedly.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Let me explain. My colleague, Mr. Nyhan, answered the question well and I was not quick enough on my feet. Dr. Brady was beside me. He has come in and done a good job. Ms Geraldine Larkin did a good job. It was a difficult question, but I withdraw the remark unreservedly and apologise to the Chairman.

I do not want to personalise anything and if I do, the Chairman should correct me. It is not our role to personalise anything, but it is to ask questions. Mr. Meaney has been on the board since 2011. There have, therefore, been many reports on his watch. Was the Morris report issued in 2015?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes.

There was a report of the agriculture committee following a presentation.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes, the Indecon report.

All on Mr. Meaney's watch.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes.

Without personalising it, there is a lack of trust. In fact, it was highlighted in the Morris report entitled, Irish Greyhound Board Anti-Doping and Medication Review. I presume Mr. Meaney has read these reports. There are serious problems with trust. According to page 3 of the Morris report it was noted-----

Is it agreed that the Vice Chairman will take the Chair?

There are few of us left to give agreement but yes.

Deputy Alan Kelly took the Chair.

The report reads: "However, it was noted during the conduct of this Review that the IGB's work for such improvements has [been] considerably disrupted and delayed by the legacy of mistrust and lack of communication on the improvements being made, leading to concerns still being raised by stakeholders on a regular basis, which paradoxically is causing further distractions and delays to these improvements". That was in 2015 and related to anti-doping and medication.

The Indecon report was related to governance, finance, regulation, animal welfare, the reduction in the number of dogs being bred, etc. I am particularly interested in animal welfare, but I have not even got to that issue. As I have told most organisations, the representatives of which have appeared before us, taxpayers' money is being spent, including on the reports produced by the Comptroller and Auditor General's office. It would be easier to appear before us and point to the recommendations made and what bodies had done. It seems that has not happened in this instance. When I asked the witnesses about the recommendations of the agriculture committee, no clear answer was given as to what had been implemented. It would be easy to tell us what had been improved in terms of governance. It could be a list of what the IGB has done, for example, employing a governance officer, a risk assessment officer and so on, indicating what the risks are, etc, but none of that has been made clear today.

My next question is to Mr. Meaney. I am sorry, but this happened on his watch. At the previous meeting he referred to what he called a legacy case from 2010. It was related to a dog that had run under the influence of an illegal substance. Is that right?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes.

For two years the trainer had a dark shadow hanging over him, but he was cleared completely. Is that correct? I am sorry, but that is a straightforward question. Was the trainer cleared completely?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Does Mr. Nyhan remember?

Dr. Seán Brady

May I speak?

Dr. Seán Brady

While they think of an answer to the Deputy's second question, I will address the achievements of the organisation, with which I had nothing to do, by the way. Five thousand samples have been tested in the laboratory and new legislation has been introduced to control the outcome in order that, if there are adverse findings, the matter will be addressed.

They are regulations, not legislation. Were regulations introduced by the Minister or was it new legislation?

Dr. Seán Brady

No, some were introduced by the organisation. The IGB has established an international scientific committee and SIS contracts were signed in December 2015. Tote revenue increased by 5% and attendances by 4.1% per meeting. Gate and food and beverages income increased by 11%. There have been some achievements in the organisation. I will pass the other question to the chairman.

I have no problem in accepting that there have been some achievements, but my question was about the serious reports carried out on every level, from animal welfare to breeding and illegal substances to governance. We have a mass of recommendations. As I tell every organisation, it would help us if we were told us what recommendations had been implemented. That would give us confidence in a board.

My train of thought is bringing me back to the case.

Mr. Frank Nyhan

I am sorry, but I had to clarify the matter because the case pre-dated my time. Yes, the trainer was exonerated.

Great. A shadow hung over the trainer for two years, even though the dog found with the illegal substance was under the control of Bord na gCon. Is that right?

Mr. Frank Nyhan

Yes.

There was a 16-day hearing before the control committee.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes.

Then there were High Court proceedings which had to be settled.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes.

The witnesses have outlined the cost of those proceedings. The trainer was exonerated and it all happened on Bord na gCon's watch. Was it prepared to settle the case? Was an offer made on Mr. Meaney's watch to save on the costs eventually incurred?

Mr. Phil Meaney

The legal advice throughout was that we should defend the case. When it reached the High Court, the legal advice was to settle.

Mr. Phil Meaney

When we were in the High Court in 2016.

On the day it was listed or-----

Mr. Phil Meaney

I am sorry; it was in 2015.

Mr. Michael Murnane

The advice was simple. If the case went to the High Court, we would be looking at a long, drawn-out process involving expert witnesses regarding when drugs were taken, etc. At that stage it was an economic decision on the probability of winning versus losing, the cost of the case if we won, the recovery cost, etc.

There was a 16-day hearing before the control committee. Is that right?

Mr. Michael Murnane

I presume it is. I am not in a position to contradict it.

Separately, there was a High Court action. When did it come up for hearing?

Mr. Michael Murnane

I believe it was listed for hearing in August or September 2015.

On Mr. Meaney's watch.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes.

Is the timing roughly correct? I am not holding Mr. Meaney to the day. Is that when the case was listed for hearing?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes.

Prior to the case being listed for hearing, was there an approach to Mr. Meaney to settle the case?

Mr. Phil Meaney

To me personally.

To Mr. Meaney personally.

Mr. Phil Meaney

No. There was no approach to me, of which I am aware. A number of people suggested to me that we should settle the case, but it obviously was not my decision. My decision and that of the board was being governed by the legal advice.

Just to be careful, I want to be fair to Mr. Meaney and there is only so much he can disclose, but he is the chairman of the board. He already knows the finding of the control committee, is that right? At this point he is fully aware of the finding of the control committee and the trainer has been totally exonerated. Is this correct?

Mr. Phil Meaney

The-----

Just listen to the question now. There was no fault whatsoever on the trainer. I think that yes is the answer to that, is it not?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes.

Okay. It is important because that person was under a shadow for a very long time so let us not add to it. The trainer was completely exonerated. There was no fault whatsoever. Proceedings are then taken. Is Mr. Meaney saying that all along the legal advice, up to the day of the hearing, was to not settle?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes, absolutely. I do not think the board would take it on themselves to make that call if that was not the legal advice.

Is Mr. Meaney saying that he, in his capacity as chairman of the board, was never approached to settle that case?

Mr. Phil Meaney

I am saying that I am very clear that people were saying to me that we should settle the case.

When Mr. Meaney says "people" are these legal people-----

Mr. Phil Meaney

No, not legal people-----

-----on behalf of the plaintiff?

Mr. Phil Meaney

I go to greyhound racing three or four nights per week. As a layman, and not in my capacity as chairman of the board, I would have said that if there was an opportunity to settle this case I would have liked to see that happening. I would not have wanted to see the board exposed to any legal costs.

Mr. Meaney can feel free to disagree with me, but I am saying that unnecessary legal costs were incurred in this regard, right up to the day of the hearing. There were opportunities to settle this case, given the facts, well before it came to the High Court. Mr. Meaney is free to disagree with me but I put this question to him.

Mr. Phil Meaney

I have no choice to disagree with you because the board was being very much said and led by the legal advice. I would say that it was more the executive than the board because the executive was dealing with the cases on a day-to-day basis and it was just coming back to the board for ratification.

Does Mr. Meaney mean the CEO as the executive?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes, the CEO.

When was the mediator appointed?

Dr. Seán Brady

Is this in regard to Shelbourne Park?

Dr. Seán Brady

I have not the date in my head at this stage but it arose from a request from former Taoiseach Brian Cowen and Ivan Yates. They suggested that Mr. Kieran Mulvey be approached to mediate between the two sides quite early on in the dispute.

Dr. Seán Brady

Yes.

What was the cost of that or is Dr. Brady free to say?

Dr. Seán Brady

It was €10,000.

With regard to the suggestion that AIB moved and had no choice but to sell, does this mean that all the property was charged?

Mr. Frank Nyhan

The Harold's Cross property was charged, yes. It was given as security.

What other property was charged as security?

Mr. Frank Nyhan

I think all the main stadia that belonged to the IGB was.

Mr. Michael Murnane

It was the main stadia of the IGB caught under the bank charge.

Under the bank charge?

Does that include Waterford and Kilkenny?

Mr. Michael Murnane

No, Kilkenny-----

Waterford-----

Mr. Michael Murnane

Waterford is included but Kilkenny does not belong to the IGB. If the committee wants a list I can send it on. It is disclosed in the annual report.

The stadia owned by IGB, effectively.

There were a number of bad decisions, and I note the witness has referred to the downturn in the economy, but the Indecon report has highlighted very inadequate capital appraisal. It was not just about the downturn in the economy, bad decisions were made. There is a legacy from bad decisions. Various other properties that have no debts are then charged. As a result of the bad decisions, plus the downturn in the economy, the other properties are charged. AIB then moves in and says it is selling the golden egg, which is the Harold's Cross stadium. Is that essentially right?

Mr. Frank Nyhan

Yes.

Mr. Meaney or Dr. Brady said last week that Harold's Cross was the sacrificial lamb, or words to that effect; a sacrifice was made or victim-----

I said the reference to "sacrifice".

And Dr. Brady agreed.

Dr. Seán Brady

I am not sure I agreed.

Dr. Seán Brady

I did not disagree.

The Indecon report did not recommend the sale of the Harold's Cross property.

Mr. Frank Nyhan

It recommended the disposal of assets.

It recommended consideration of the disposal of a number of assists, and it included a list.

Mr. Frank Nyhan

Yes.

It looks like the AIB said that the Harold's Cross property should be sold.

Mr. Frank Nyhan

We had decided as a board. When I came on to the board in December 2015 the decision had been made that we would dispose of the Harold's Cross stadium.

Mr. Frank Nyhan

That decision was reaffirmed by the new board I was on.

The decision was made by a previous board in 2015?

Mr. Frank Nyhan

Yes.

For the record, what date was the decision made?

Mr. Michael Murnane

It goes back to the previous board which adopted the 27 recommendations from Indecon, including the creation of an asset disposal strategy and mentioning Harold's Cross. That was October 2014.

What date did the board decide to sell the Harold's Cross property officially? If there were two board decisions then it was made twice.

Mr. Frank Nyhan

It was affirmed during my time on the board and there will be a record of that as to the date.

Mr. Phil Meaney

A decision in principle was made initially that we would accept the 27 findings of the Indecon report. There is a board minute to cover that after the Indecon report.

The witness confirmed earlier that they accepted the recommendations in principle.

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes.

Is this the decision to which Mr. Nyhan refers?

Mr. Frank Nyhan

I was not on that board but I was informed when I came on to the board in December that a decision had been made to sell the Harold's Cross stadium. This was discussed by the new board and the decision was affirmed.

In fact, there was not a decision.

Mr. Frank Nyhan

I do not know. I was informed that there was.

So we do not know.

Mr. Frank Nyhan

There will be a record.

What I know from the answers today is that at some stage the board endorsed all the recommendations of Indecon. Is this correct? There were other recommendations in the Indecon report. Which of those did the board implement in the context of assets?

Mr. Michael Murnane

There were four separate assets mentioned in the Indecon report. One was the old head office in Henry Street.

That has been sold. What of the asset in Cork?

Mr. Michael Murnane

There is a small parcel of land in Cork and when I was before the committee perviously I said that there is a small issue with a compulsory purchase order that might make it even smaller. This matter is under consideration. There was another piece of property that was office space in Shelbourne Park. None of those assets on their own would have achieved anywhere near the value that would have impacted on the loan.

Did the board look at all of those assets and come up with a valuation?

Mr. Michael Murnane

The valuation of the property in Shelbourne Park has not been looked at yet. It would not be prudent to spend money on a valuer for the land in Cork while the CPO is going on. We will have to see how that affects the piece of the property that is left. It is a small piece of property.

Would I be unfair to say that the board zoned in on the Harold's Cross site? Other matters did not take as much as the board's attention because the crucial thing was to pay down the debt and the pressure from AIB. Would this be fair to say?

Mr. Michael Murnane

We were trying to sell Meelick also, another parcel of ground, but the simple fact of the matter is that Meelick is worth an inconsequential amount of money in the context of the trigger date that was coming on 9 December.

I must say that I find that frightening. I know that it is being put down as a legacy issue. Mr. Creed rightly corrected the figure, which was €1 million, and about €900,000 was spent on development fees and so on. It is worth €100,000. No one is accountable, the site is landlocked - it might be clarified as to whether it is on a flood plain - and we are asked to not go back there but to move on. The legacy of all these decision is absolutely-----

Mr. Pat Creed

We inherited those decisions. They go back to pre-----

I know. That point has been made.

Mr. Pat Creed

In December 2015 when this board came together we tried to resolve these issues and to make sure we had appropriate governance structures going forward so these things do not happen again.

I appreciate that but-----

Mr. Pat Creed

I wish to go back to the issue of the Harold's Cross track. AIB has been very clear that the dischargement of the outstanding debt was based on the sale of the Harold's Cross site. That was the realisable asset that was going to come anywhere near meeting the quantum of debt that was outstanding. It was very clear.

I understand that, and I understand the board inherited the decisions. Mr. Meaney was there before so he was part of the inheritance that came forward.

Mr. Phil Meaney

No. Excuse me. The reports before the committee from Indecon, the agriculture committee and the Morris report were all in my time. The building of the Limerick track and the Meelick-----

I know they were prior but-----

Mr. Phil Meaney

-----and the debt associated with that-----

I agree with all of that. What I am saying, however, is that all these reports were on Mr. Meaney's time, with the exception of the Dalton report in 2006.

All of these reports point out serious difficulties that continued under Mr. Meaney's time because none of these recommendations have been implemented.

Mr. Phil Meaney

I do not have an update regarding the Indecon report with me. All 27 of the Indecon recommendations have been implemented, are being worked on or require primary legislation.

Dr. Seán Brady

I can give the Deputy numbers. There were 27 recommendations, 24 of which have been implemented.

Has the annual review of the board's performance been implemented?

Mr. Phil Meaney

Yes.

We will find an annual review somewhere that states what-----

Mr. Phil Meaney

We only started this last year. The board members were reviewed and we then had the reviews independently assessed.

Who assessed them?

Mr. Phil Meaney

A Dr. Purcell.

Will we see that assessment of the board somewhere?

Mr. Phil Meaney

I do not know. I need to discuss that with the board.

The Chairman is signalling me to stop, so I will raise just two other matters. Indecon or the agriculture committee - I am not sure which - made a recommendation to examine all racing tracks to see what debt they had, what advantages they had and where IGB was going with them. Has that been carried out?

Mr. Frank Nyhan

I do not think it has been carried out as an individual exercise, but every monthly board meeting gets a report on every single track as to how it is performing.

There was a recommendation.

Mr. Frank Nyhan

Yes, but it happens every single month.

Is there an assessment anywhere that IGB, or somebody on its behalf, has carried out of all of these racing tracks, as recommended, and if so, where can I find it?

Mr. Phil Meaney

I am not aware of any such assessment.

Is the land in Galway owned by Bord na gCon?

Mr. Phil Meaney

No.

I ask the witnesses to explain to me about Galway.

Mr. Michael Murnane

The Galway Show Society owns that land.

Is Bord na gCon leasing it?

Mr. Michael Murnane

It is a long sporting lease we have there.

Mr. Michael Murnane

I think it is for 99 years. I am open to correction, but-----

What does IGB pay for that?

Mr. Michael Murnane

It is a nominal figure - €6,000 or something like that. It is very small. There is then a sublease of that land to the Irish Rugby Football Union on to Connacht Rugby.

To go back, was it not a clear recommendation that IGB would look at all of its assets and see what was possible? For instance, if we move to the Comptroller and Auditor General's report, he gives you a clear audit, I think, with a caution in respect of a going concern. It is a going concern because of Government assistance. Is that not correct? What do the figures for 2016 show?

Mr. Michael Murnane

The figures for 2016 are broadly similar to those for 2015. As I mentioned to Deputy Kelly, there has been a reduction in the contingent liability regarding pensions, and the extra prize money has come out as an expense, but there has been an increased allocation from the Horse and Greyhound Racing Fund. In respect of the tracks, since I joined the board there has been a continuous downward decline. As the committee will be aware, revenue was a bit behind last year, which was in turn a bit behind the previous year. There has been very much a stabilisation of the trade, even at some of the more rural parks. Deputy Connolly mentioned Galway. Galway had it fairly okay this year compared to previous years, and we were seeing some significant growth in the Dublin market, duly supported by Shelbourne Park.

My question was what the figures for 2016 indicate. In 2015, it was barely a going a concern. Is 2016 showing the same thing, leaving aside the debt?

Mr. Michael Murnane

Bord na gCon is reliant on the Horse and Greyhound Racing Fund for the payment of prize money. I do not think the figures are ready, but the only thing 2016 might show would be the conclusion of the sale of Harold's Cross, which would reduce some of the going concern issues in respect of the bank.

IGB had a strategic plan; it has run out of date. It has made a small number of updates as a result of the Indecon report. It was highlighted that IGB needed to look at its strategic plan and at all the racing tracks and needed to look to see what it would do with them. That really has not been done.

Mr. Michael Murnane

There are financial projections prepared for the next four or five years as regards where we are with the bank. Those projections, obviously, form part of the discussions with the bank. From that point of view, they are projections, not the narrative of a strategic plan. However, what is happening at present in respect of negotiations at AIB would strongly influence where any strategic plan would direct the organisation.

I will ask my last question, which goes back to stakeholders. This was not something that was pulled out of the sky. The establishment of a stakeholders forum was a strong recommendation. It was recommended that all relevant stakeholders be on it, including the Department. That really did not happen in any formal way, inasmuch as IGB did not tell anyone a new forum was being set up and that it would meet on a regular basis, including with Department officials. That did not happen, did it?

Mr. Phil Meaney

It did. I think it was Deputy Kelly who mentioned - somebody did - that we did not invite the bookmakers, and there was nothing to that, but we did write to all stakeholders to invite them in, and the Minister himself attended one of the-----

Mr. Meaney has already said that, and I heard him, but the whole point of the new forum was to rebuild trust. Anyway, I have said it-----

In fairness, it was not me who mentioned that, but it does not matter. It was Deputy Burke, I think - or was it Deputy Aylward? I think Mr. Walsh wants to say something there.

Mr. Colin Walsh

I am not sure whether I answered the Deputy earlier about the forum. It has been a long day. I cannot remember. The forum was established on a formal basis. There have been three meetings. The first was on 15 March 2016. A range of representative groups, a cross-section representing the industry, attended. There was an agenda agreed in advance and there were minutes and notes taken at the meetings. The second meeting took place on 14 July 2016, at which again a cross-section of representative groups of the industry attended and there was an agenda. The meeting was carried out in a formal, structured way. The third meeting took place on 10 November 2016. It was attended by the Minister of State, Deputy Doyle, and other representatives from the Department. Again, representative groups and other different groups attended. It was a structured, minuted, agenda-led forum. That formal forum exists.

I think Deputy Aylward has one small-----

Are the laboratory and the facilities in Limerick owned by IGB? Are they up to scratch? Have the witnesses full trust in them?

Dr. Seán Brady

We have absolute trust in them. A new machine has been installed. It is world-class. There are only five or six of them in the world. It is the best available technology. It was installed in January. It is commissioned and working very well.

Are there professional staff there?

Dr. Seán Brady

Absolutely - talented people.

Mr. Michael Murnane

It is subject to audit each and every year as well.

There are rumours going around that they were not up to scratch and that people are sending samples off to England to get tested instead of sending them to Limerick. Is there any truth in that?

Who audits it, just as a matter of interest?

Mr. Michael Murnane

I do not have the detail of that.

What type of organisation audits it?

Mr. Pat Herbert

The Irish National Accreditation Board. It is accredited to ISO standard 17025.

Is it true that some people, rather than accepting the results from the Limerick laboratory, get their own tests done in England? I ask these questions because I was told this is happening, so I just want to put the matter to bed. Is there any truth in this or are these just rumours?

Dr. Seán Brady

In the past, to my knowledge, some samples were sent to England for testing, but since January, since the new machine was installed in the organisation, no samples, to my knowledge, have gone abroad. The machine that is there now is best in class.

I was told that some samples were given to the Limerick laboratory and then were sent to England from where the results differed. Maybe it is a rumour. I would like to have it clarified in public here.

The witnesses might write to the committee to clarify that - that since this new machine was installed, no samples have been sent outside Limerick.

Dr. Seán Brady

We can do that. It is not a cheap machine. It is a €400,000 machine. It is quite an expensive machine.

How many staff are in the laboratory in Limerick?

Dr. Seán Brady

Three people plus a manager.

Is it self-sufficient with regard to payments for samples or does the board have to subsidise it?

Mr. Michael Murnane

The full cost is to the IGB.

The full cost is to the IGB

Mr. Michael Murnane

Yes. The cost in 2016 was €40,000 less than what it was in 2007. Someone referred to there being 5,500 samples so there is a fair bit of work being done for what is being achieved down there.

Are the dogs taken at random or do people pick them out? Who picks them out? Is the IGB is responsible for sampling for doping all that kind of thing.

Mr. Michael Murnane

It is random.

Mr. Michael Murnane

It can be targeted.

There is an issue I want to put to bed. We had a presentation in the AV room and the former chairman said if he was in charge the IGB would work its way out of this thing rather than selling off Harold's Cross. The debt is €22 million. There are a lot of people employed and a lot of property there so if there was no danger of the bank foreclosing, the IGB could work its way out of it if they had the gumption or willpower to do it instead of taking the soft option of selling Harold's Cross. Will the witnesses comment on that-----

Dr. Seán Brady

As an outsider-----

-----so these things can be put away rather than people saying these things?

Dr. Seán Brady

As an outsider with 30 years' senior management experience, the reality is the bank issue had to be dealt with. The only available asset that would solve the problem was Harold's Cross. What is right is not always popular and what is popular is not always right.

Does Mr. Brady rubbish what has been said about the board working its way out of it?

Dr. Seán Brady

I am not in the business of rubbishing what anyone else says but as the interim CEO, I judge the facts as I see them and having looked at them very carefully with the great team that work in the organisation.

Will Mr. Creed comment?

Mr. Pat Creed

There is no possibility we could generate the revenues required to meet the bank debt in the short term while the bank debt was over us. There is a number floating around of €31 million that was lost. That presumes the economy, which was booming in 2007, would have continued to boom all the way through to 2017. I will use an analogy from a business I am very familiar with, which is the Irish motor industry. It is often used as a barometer of economic growth and macroeconomic growth. The Irish motor industry was selling nearly 200,000 new cars in 2005 and 2006. It sold 57,500 new cars in 2008. It crawled its way back to 140,000 new cars in 2016. Mentioning the €31 million figure is like saying if the motor industry continued to sell 200,000 cars in 2008, 2009 and 2011, the available revenue would be a particular amount. That never happened because we had a massive recession so the number does not stack up. We have a debt problem that needs to be cleared. We cannot generate enough revenue or EBITA to meet that debt. We have a bank that wants to get paid back because the debt is seriously in default. There is only one option to substantially increase prize money and put the industry back on a solid footing and that is to discharge the outstanding debt. It is the only option, namely, to do it and do it now.

My last question is on the intermediary that has been mentioned. What can be done to get over this hump and the strife that is going on? How can it be moved forward to get the industry back up and running again, get Shelbourne open again and get the people coming to attend race meetings again? This is the last thing I will ask. What does the board see as the way to alleviate the situation?

Dr. Seán Brady

Based on the conversations I have heard and had with people in the past week, I think the price received for Harold's Cross has given a greater understanding of the path forward. In the coming weeks, negotiations will take place and a solution will be found.

I have been asked to ask a question. Three Friday night meetings were cancelled in Waterford in March this year. I do not know if it has anything to do with the board but I have been asked to ask about it by a local man from south Kilkenny in my constituency. Race meetings were supposed to start on Friday, 10 February but they did not start until 31 February. This man complains he lost out on three races. He had a lot of dogs. Does the board have any comment on that? It is a local issue in Waterford. He asked me to ask about it and I said I would.

Mr. Michael Murnane

The stadium in Waterford was running one night a week in January and February and there was-----

That is right but they usually open on 10 February but this year they did not open until 31 February for two nights on Friday and Saturday.

Mr. Michael Murnane

Discretion is left to the local manager because he might want to run a night in February and if he does not run in February, he might want to run in December.

To run it on 31 February is some achievement.

Yes. Whatever the date was.

Mr. Michael Murnane

That discretion is left locally to the managers because they need to manage their facilities.

As politicians we always have to think locally.

We always have to think locally. Mr. Creed gave very passionate evidence. I will not reopen old wounds; we will agree to disagree. The €31 million might not be absolute. I accept it could be another figure. The analysis does not correlate to the horse racing industry, which did not go through the same ups and downs as the greyhound industry. I will not reopen old wounds. We have gone around it enough.

There have been a number of requests for documents and questions. I would appreciate if the board would supply them through the secretariat. Instead of taking up time in the meeting, some detailed information on the pension, racing test and other things will be supplied. Does the committee agree to dispose of the 2015 financial statements of Bord na gCon? Agreed.

When the board is giving the documents could we get clarification on the premises in Limerick that is supposed to be empty overhead? I forgot to come to it. Why is it empty and how long has it been empty?

The secretariat will do all that. I thank the witnesses for their time. They have been here for two days. I thank them for their time and engagement on this issue. On behalf of the Committee of Public Accounts, I thank the witnesses from Bord na gCon and the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine for the material they supplied to the committee. Unless there is any other business, which I am sure there is not, the meeting is adjourned until 25 May.

The witnesses withdrew.
The committee adjourned at 5.27 p.m. until 9 a.m. on Thursday, 25 May 2017.
Top
Share