COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS debate -
Tuesday, 11 Jul 2023

RTÉ Commercial Arrangements: Mr. Ryan Tubridy and Mr. Noel Kelly

An Cathaoirleach

I welcome everyone and remind all those in attendance to ensure that their mobile phones are switched off or in silent mode. Before we start, I wish to explain some limitations to parliamentary privilege and the practices of the Houses of the Oireachtas with regard to references that witnesses can make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence of witnesses physically present, or who give evidence from within the parliamentary precincts, is protected pursuant to both the Constitution and statute by absolute privilege. This means that witnesses have an absolute defence against any defamation action for anything they say at the meeting. However, they are expected not to abuse that privilege and it is my duty as Cathaoirleach to ensure it is not abused. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with such directions.

Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such as way as to make him or her identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name or reputation of a person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with such directions.

Members are reminded of the provisions within Standing Order 218 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 policies. Members are also reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

We are joined by the Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. Seamus McCarthy, who is a permanent witness to this committee. Today we will engage with Mr. Ryan Tubridy and Mr. Noel Kelly. Mr. Tubridy and Mr. Kelly have been advised of the areas on which the committee will focus. They are payments to presenters and personnel in RTÉ, specifically from 2017 to date; details of Mr. Ryan Tubridy's contractual relationship with RTÉ including related payments and exit fees; the process relating to the tripartite agreement of 2020 including its negotiations and sign off; the content of that tripartite agreement and issue of its being underwritten by RTÉ; the raising of associated invoices and related payments; the details of the invoices and who was aware of same; any instructions given by Mr. Ryan Tubridy to Mr. Noel Kelly and any further discussions in that regard before finalising the agreement; the call on 7 May 2020 and the letter that followed from Ms Dee Forbes to Mr. Ryan Turbridy; and any matters arising from material provided to the committee in advance of the meeting or materials provided by RTÉ to the committee.

I thank the witnesses for appearing. We did not have to compel them and I welcome the fact they attended voluntarily before this committee to assist in our examinations. Before I ask Mr. Tubridy for his opening statement, I must mention that the documents have come late. We were promised them yesterday morning. We did not receive them. Some members received them as they were travelling here this morning and only had sight of them in the past hour. I must also set out the position of the witnesses' legal adviser. I remind witnesses that the attendance of the legal adviser is with the agreement of the committee. He is not entitled to contribute, to disrupt the meeting or interfere with the conduct of the meeting in any way. I now call Mr. Tubridy to give his opening statement.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I thank the committee for acceding to my request to come before it today. We felt it was really important to be here. I have always believed in the importance of public service. I was brought up that way, and I have great respect for the Oireachtas as an institution. I have come here, as members know, voluntarily, because I believe in the work the committee is doing. I do not say that in any other way than that I want to assist in every way I can. I appreciate there will be many questions so I will try to keep my opening statement as short as possible. I begin by clearly and unambiguously at the very outset this morning stating that I am truly sorry for all of this and for any part which I have played, be it consciously or unconsciously, and anything that has contributed to the debacle we are dealing with today.

I apologise to the committee that it has had to take the time to deal with this matter, to my colleagues in RTÉ and to my listeners.

Given the events of the past three weeks, there is a lot I wish and need to say, so I ask the committee please to bear with me. My aim is to help correct and clarify some very serious matters and I will be relying on my agent, Noel Kelly, to go through the figures and provide greater detail. I would like everybody here today to understand that the figures and statements presented by RTÉ over the past few weeks in respect of my remuneration have created a fog of confusion over what I was paid, when I was paid, what I knew and when I knew it. Full transparency and disclosure on RTE's part, I am sorry to say, would simply have avoided much of this. I am here to do one thing and one thing only, namely, to set the record straight and call out some untruths. There are seven material untruths I would like to address.

The first is the claim I did not take a pay cut from RTE in 2020. This is not true. I took a 20% pay cut from RTE in my 2020 to 2025 contract. It is as simple as that. I am obliged to present 205 radio shows and 38, as it was then, live two-hour episodes of "The Late Late Show" under this contract. I am an independent contractor. I get no pension or entitlements from RTE – that is the nature of it. Under the terms of my contract, I am allowed to do additional work outside of RTE – that is also the nature of it. I stress there is nothing morally, ethically or legally wrong with me or any independent contractor doing additional work for another client outside of RTE. To be clear, I took a pay cut from RTE of 20% in 2020 for each of the five years of my contract, at a cost to me of €525,000 over the length of that contract.

The second untruth is the suggestion my decision to retire from "The Late Late Show" was prompted by this whole debacle. This is not remotely true. I was not aware of any of this fiasco when I decided to retire from "The Late Late Show". I made my initial decision to leave "The Late Late Show" pretty much a year ago. It was very personal and was made in the heart and the soul. Around this time, I mentioned it to those closest to me, my family, my agent and a few others. They were very surprised, asking why I would leave such a show. I explained to them, and eventually brought them round to my way of thinking, that, among other things, I had left a lot of myself on the studio floor after Covid. I was burned out and exhausted. A lot of people in this country, as we know, are burned out and exhausted after Covid, having done much more important jobs than I was doing, but that is where I was coming from. I turned it over in my mind over a few months but by the time I got to January, I had made my decision and knew it was time to go. To make it abundantly clear, there is zero connection between my departure and this very raw situation of recent weeks. I informed management on 13 March of this year. I first became aware of this Grant Thornton review in May, some two months later, and even then had no inkling of the bombshell that was to come when RTÉ released its statement of 22 June.

The third untruth is that I was covertly or secretly overpaid by RTE. This is not true. I was not overpaid by RTE at any point. I fully accept I am very well paid - I understand that - but I was paid fully in accordance with my contract, which my agent negotiated openly, honestly and in good faith. There are no overpayments. There are RTE's under-declarations, on which we challenged them in 2020, and there are, indeed, RTE's over-declarations of what they actually paid me in 2020 and 2021. This has caused justifiable anger among my colleagues. I understand that, and we are going to deal with all that over the next six hours, or as long as it takes. The upshot of RTE's inaccurate declarations is an impression that I have been less than honest. This is not the case.

The fourth untruth is that I was aware RTE was trying to conceal payments to me. This is not true. I was not aware RTE was concealing payments to me. RTE acknowledged this in its statement of 27 June of this year when it stated Grant Thornton had made no findings against me.

The fifth untruth is that there was a secret agreement with Renault that I tried to conceal. This is not true but not only that, it beggars belief. Think about it. I had a separate commercial agreement with Renault – the basis of which was that I would make public appearances and perform roadshows and things for them. The work that I have done for Renault is all over social media. The suggestion that was a secret makes no sense.

The sixth untruth is that RTÉ's underwriting of Renault's payment obligations was a secret. This is not true. RTÉ's underwriting of Renault's payment obligations was not a secret. As the documents we have prepared for the committee today show, and as my agent will explain in more detail, RTÉ committed in February 2020 to provide this guarantee in the early stages of contract negotiations around my 2020 to 2025 contract. This is unequivocally confirmed in an email entitled "critical document", dated 20 February 2020 from Breda O'Keeffe to my agent. It was copied to other members of the executive board: the director general, and RTÉ's solicitor's office. Everyone in RTÉ who needed to know, knew. Members will find this on page 10 of the booklet of documents they have in front of them. Far from being secret, it was well-known.

Finally, the seventh untruth is that I did not ask RTÉ about its under-declarations of my earnings. When RTÉ released the 2017, 2018 and 2019 earnings, all on the one day, 20 January 2021, this is a question I did not ask at that time. This is a question I should have asked. I fully accept that but I will try to explain it briefly and as clearly as humanly possible. At the end of the 2015 to 2020 contract, my agent advised me that I was entitled to a phenomenally large payment of €120,000, that has been variously called a loyalty or end of contract, or exit payment. I did not invoice for that payment. I did not pursue that payment and I did not receive any payment. The documents provided to the committee bear this out. In my simple view, I had foregone that payment for €120,000 and not taken it, but because of how RTÉ reported that decision in its accounts, the narrative of the last three weeks has been that not only did I take this payment but that I somehow contrived to hide it. Let me reiterate: I actually waived my entitlement to this payment and I did not receive one cent of it. I hid nothing. I had nothing to hide. As the evidence provided to the committee today shows, my agent had already pointed out to RTÉ in 2020 that we thought the manner in which they were planning to account for my earnings in 2017, 2018 and 2019 was incorrect. We had understood that they accepted our position so that by the time they released the figures, I assumed that the chief financial officer, the financial professionals in RTÉ and the external auditors who had audited the accounts in these years, 2017, 2018 and 2019, had accountancy reasons for accounting for it the way they did. I would like to add that my company earnings fully reflect what I earned in these and all subsequent years.

I am particularly upset and disappointed about the decision and framing of the RTÉ statement of 22 June, which inextricably linked my name to this whole fiasco. My name was mentioned 15 times in that statement and I was not consulted once. I did not have the Grant Thornton report, which RTÉ had and which RTÉ acknowledged made no findings of wrongdoing on my part. I asked RTÉ to clarify that this was the case; it did four days later, after much of the damage was done. Pretty much all of the damage was done. I signed a contract in good faith. I declared my earnings and I paid every cent of tax. My employer has acknowledged that it has engaged in deceptive practices to pay me - practices that were hidden from me.

I am nearly finished. Please forgive me for going over my time. The result is that I have become the face of a national scandal. I have been accused of being complicit, deceitful and dishonest. I think the statement of 22 June was very unhelpful in this regard. The full truth was concealed. I take full responsibility. I cannot say it enough. I take full responsibility for not asking more questions back on 20 January 2021 when the figures for 2017, 2018 and 2019 were released. I take responsibility for that. I understand but, as has become abundantly clear and obvious in the last three weeks: this highlights the existence of two RTÉs. There are those who were involved in attempting to conceal payments and who were in a position to call me or call my agent and ask for our help in establishing the full facts.

Instead, they chose to hurriedly issue a deeply damaging statement on 22 June, which failed to include the full facts.

I have nothing but respect and admiration for the great number of decent, hardworking people in RTÉ. They are my colleagues and friends. I am very sorry for those whose lives have been made difficult by an incessant dripping of new revelations. I am thinking particularly about my radio show colleagues and friends who have had to be put through all of this for reasons not of their own making. They all work hard in RTÉ. I thank those colleagues who supported me through these last few weeks.

In closing, I thank the many people from across the country who have taken time to stop me on the street, decent Irish citizens who have taken my shoulder and elbow in their hands and said, "You will get through this." I have cards and letters, nearly a foot off the ground, from people who have written to "Ryan Tubridy, Dublin". I got them, and fair play to the postpeople in An Post. I thank the Irish people for that. I am hopeful they will see from my statement and appearance here today that I am determined to inform them of the truth and to demonstrate that I have nothing to hide. I am also hopeful that I will soon get back on air to do the job I love. Thank you all for your patience.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Mr. Tubridy. It is normally five minutes for opening statements-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Apologies.

An Cathaoirleach

-----and we are 15 minutes into the meeting. I ask you to be as brief as you can, Mr. Kelly. We want to give you the opportunity because we realise you are here today to give your side, so please co-operate.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I want to echo everything Mr. Tubridy has said. I am sorry we are here today as well. We asked to come and meet the committee because we have huge respect for it. We have not spoken to anybody else. We just wanted to get the opportunity to put our side across. I will try to be as brief as I possibly can if the Cathaoirleach will allow it.

I thank the committee for the opportunity to meet with it today. I hope this meeting will help to clarify the confusion which has arisen over the past few weeks. We appreciate the seriousness of all these issues. The controversy over the past two weeks has been damaging to RTÉ but it has also been hugely damaging to Ryan Tubridy, me and my business.

Earlier today, we circulated a pack which we believe contains the key documents that will help to understand this crisis. The document runs to 39 pages and it includes relevant excerpts from Mr. Tubridy's 2015 and 2020 contracts with RTÉ, extracts from the accounts of Mr. Tubridy’s company for the relevant years and various mails which track the back-and-forth negotiations for the 2020 RTÉ contract with Renault. We have made redactions where necessary, but we have been as transparent as possible to inform the committee with all the information at our disposal. I want to highlight a number of documents which go to the heart of the issues.

Let me start with the under-declaration of payments made to Mr. Tubridy when they were published. These are the figures for 2017, 2018, 2019 and January 2021. This issue has caused a lot of distress and it is entirely a mess of RTÉ’s own making. Mr. Tubridy’s contract from 2015 - pages 1 to 4 of the pack - clearly states the fees he received in each of the following five years. They are set out in clause 8.1 of the contract and were €495,000, €495,000, €545,000, €545,000 and €545,000 for the five years. Mr. Tubridy received those fees exactly, nothing more and nothing less. This is confirmed in the extracts from Mr. Tubridy's filed accounts company, Tuttle Productions, which we also include in the pack. We note that the accounts of Tuttle Productions run from January to December, whereas RTÉ's contract ran from September.

In January 2021, when RTÉ made its incorrect declarations, it knew what it had paid Mr. Tubridy. Indeed, the chief financial officer emailed us on 19 December 2019 - this is on page 5 in the pack. She set out the actual earnings for each of the relevant years correctly but just over a year later, in January 2021, RTÉ made false or incorrect declarations about the same figures. In some respects, this was an accident waiting to happen. We previously asked RTÉ to give us reasonable notice when it planned to publish figures. My email on 16 January 2020 - on page 6 of the pack - specifically requests this. If it had done that, we would have had time to check the figures and avoid errors. However, RTÉ ignored our request for reasons I still do not understand.

In March 2020, we saw the first sign that RTÉ, with all its accountants and auditors, might be struggling to understand the correct accounting treatment for what they paid Mr. Tubridy in 2017, 2018 and 2019.

That month RTÉ sent us a letter about an exit fee Mr. Tubridy was due as part of his 2015 contract. It was agreed that Mr. Tubridy was not going to raise an invoice for this and RTÉ wanted to agree how to explain it. However, in the draft sent to us, RTÉ proposed to change the payments it had made to Mr. Tubridy already, effectively lowering them by €120,000. The logic was that it could offset the €120,000 we had agreed not to ask for in 2020 against payments that had already made to Mr. Tubridy for 2017, 2018 and 2019. We argued against this and RTÉ accepted our points at the time. This is clear from the document at pages 14 to 16 of our pack. For some reason, however, it looks like the confused thinking returned and RTÉ published the wrong figures again in January 2021, effectively causing huge reputational damage to Mr. Tubridy in the process.

Another important point I should add is that just last month, on 23 June, RTÉ published new figures. It effectively restated figures for payments to Mr. Tubridy for 2017, 2018 and 2019 and added in declarations for figures paid to him in 2020 and 2021. Bizarrely, the figures RTÉ declared for both 2020 and 2021 are wrong. In both years, it overstated the amount it paid Mr. Tubridy. We address this issue on pages 28 and 29 of the pack. For 2020, RTÉ overstated earnings of €62,536 and for 2021, it overstated €83,381. Clearly, RTÉ is still struggling with these declarations.

I turn to the Renault contract which ran parallel to the 2020 contract Mr. Tubridy had with RTÉ. I refer members to page 5 of the pack. This is an email sent to NK Management on 19 December 2019 by RTÉ's then chief financial officer, CFO, Ms Breda O'Keeffe. This email sets out RTÉ’s starting position for negotiations on the 2020 contract. Members will see that this email is where the idea of a commercial sponsorship with a third party with an annual fee of €75,000 is first suggested. This comes from RTÉ. This did not strike us as unusual as Renault was a key sponsor for RTÉ, so it was understandable that it would wish to ensure all parties were aligned.

Next we come to RTÉ's decision to underwrite this Renault contract. This is perhaps the most shocking revelation of this morning. Since this controversy began, RTÉ has tried to distance itself from this decision. It has effectively blamed former director general Dee Forbes for doing a solo run and giving a verbal commitment to underwrite the contract on a Zoom call in May. RTÉ executives said there was a strong pushback against the idea of underwriting the agreement. That is incorrect. I refer members to page 10 of the pack. At the time, Ms O’Keeffe was the chief financial officer of RTÉ. On page 10, members will see an email she sent to my office. It is dated 20 February 2020. It is copied to another member of the executive board, the then director general and RTÉ’s solicitor. In this email Ms O’Keeffe responds in red to various points which had been discussed. She states at the top of the email that this is "our final position", because negotiations go back and forth, in respect of the new contract. In the last paragraph on this page, Ms O’Keeffe, on behalf of RTÉ, states explicitly "we can provide you with a side letter to underwrite this fee for the duration of the contract". There was no secret; there is no secret. To our surprise, Ms O’Keeffe told the committee last week that when she left RTÉ in March there was no support to provide that type of guarantee and no such guarantee was on offer. However, she had written to us making exactly that offer a month earlier. Last week, nobody from RTÉ here with Ms O’Keeffe challenged her when she said that. We were surprised too because on 30 June, four days before she appeared at the media committee, we wrote to RTÉ and highlighted the significance of Ms O’Keeffe’s email.

Ms O'Keeffe's email also casts a new light on the contribution of Adrian Lynch, deputy director general, to the committee. Mr. Lynch told the committee that agreement to underwrite the contract was given verbally on a Zoom call with NK Management on 7 May by the then director general. He described this as "the significant point at the centre of this". RTÉ has tried to portray the guarantee as a decision given late in the negotiations on a Zoom call by Dee Forbes without the awareness of the executive board.

Clearly, that is not correct. The decision was taken early by RTÉ and was known widely within the executive board of RTÉ.

Let me move now to the invoicing arrangements for the Renault contract. Our document pack shows that RTÉ did not just suggest the idea of a contract with Renault; it oversaw every development and implementation of same. We were happy with that. We knew Renault was a major sponsor for RTÉ so RTÉ would be committed to keeping it happy. We knew the contract with Renault was a separate contract from Mr. Tubridy’s independent contractor services contract with RTÉ for radio and TV work. We understood that Mr. Tubridy would have to do extra work for Renault but that was no different from the other work he would do for the BBC or for his publishers etc. This was just a separate commercial agreement. Mr. Tubridy was agreeing to a substantial pay cut from RTÉ and he was entitled to seek other work outside RTÉ. There was nothing secret about this - far from it. The contract required Mr. Tubridy to do public appearances for Renault for which it could seek and expect attention, as indeed it did.

With the terms agreed, RTÉ instructed us on how to invoice for this work. For the first invoice, it instructed us to raise an invoice directly with Renault. It gave us names and details and set out the proposed narrative for the invoice. The committee can see the instructions RTÉ gave us for this in an email on 24 July 2020 on page 23 in our document pack and on page 24 it can see the invoice we did indeed send to Renault. When it came to the second and third invoices, RTÉ gave us new instructions. I refer the committee to page 25 of the pack, showing an email from RTÉ’s then commercial director, Ms Geraldine O’Leary, dated 29 April 2022. This invoice passes on instructions for how invoices two and three should be raised. That email instructed us on the company name to be put on the invoice, namely, Astus; the address to be put on the invoice; and the VAT reference to be included on the invoice. The email instructed us not to put any person’s name on it. This email also gave us a general assurance from a colleague of Ms O’Leary’s that "if he [meaning NK Management] sends it back to me I will then sort everything else out."

The committee should know that while the invoices were made out to Astus, we were directed to email them to RTÉ and it would do what was necessary to process them with Astus. I should stress that at this time we in NK Management had no idea who Astus was. We had no reason to think Astus was linked to RTÉ or that it was acting on behalf of RTÉ. We had no idea it might be making payments to us on behalf of RTÉ or that the payments were linked to RTÉ underwriting the Renault contract. RTÉ never said that to us. Astus never said that to us. Renault never said that to us. We simply followed the instructions we were given as we had with the first invoice. The committee will see a copy of the two invoices we raised in the name of Astus, sent by email from us to RTÉ, in the pack on pages 26 and 27.

People have asked why we went along with those instructions and why we did not set out more detail about what the invoices related to. At the time we had no reason to suspect RTÉ might be trying to hide payments to Mr. Tubridy. I am still shocked that was its intention. We trusted RTÉ. It is not some unknown start-up, with opaque funding, a chequered past or a record for dodgy financial dealings. It is a national institution that is almost 100 years old. It is a massive business turning over €350 million a year. It has internal and external auditors. It has a heavyweight board and teams of financial advisers and accountants. As Mr. Bakhurst said yesterday, RTÉ has robust processes and rigorous oversight of finances in many parts of the organisation. That is what we assumed too. Why would we suspect it was hiding information about one of its key contracts? Why would it even do that?

We are nearing the end. I am sorry but this is important. I want to address one other thing. There has been a lot of coverage of a side letter with the 2020 contract in which the RTÉ director general says the agreed earnings in the contract will not be reduced during the term of the contract. As any lawyer will confirm, this letter had no practical impact. The contract itself guarantees the earnings; that is what a contract does. We were simply trying to impress on RTÉ that Mr. Tubridy had just signed up to new cuts in his 2020 contract of €525,000 and had also never taken the payment of €120,000 so RTÉ should not even think about coming back for more cuts given the size of those cuts.

To conclude, for the past number of years Mr. Tubridy has continued to perform at the highest level, working with millions of colleagues and leading shows which brought in, over a six-year period, €100 million in revenue to RTÉ. He raised tens of millions for charities through the toy show appeals and various others.

We have heard a lot about RTÉ's public service ethos but let us call a spade a spade. RTÉ is a hybrid organisation. Its commercial activities are key to keeping the station afloat, maintaining jobs and creating content. Ryan Tubridy has been a huge driver for RTÉ's most successful commercial activities over the past 14 years.

Ryan and I, and our families and friends, have attracted a horrendous amount of criticism and abuse in the past few weeks, which I would not wish on anybody, and why? Because the only figure in this whole story whose face was recognisable was Ryan Tubridy's. He has been made a poster boy for this scandal and that is undeserved. This is not the Ryan Tubridy scandal; this is the RTÉ scandal.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank the witnesses for those opening statements. Before we move to the committee members, Mr. Tubridy might clarify one issue for me. Obviously, the invoices for the payments of €75,000 were what brought this to light in March when the auditors found them. I want to ask Mr. Tubridy to set the scene for this meeting this morning. That €75,000 shortfall gap or additional payment - call it what you like - had to be made up. The country was shut down.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Yes.

An Cathaoirleach

Thousands of my constituents and people around the country were on a €200 or €300 per week pandemic payment. Did Mr. Tubridy or his agent between them have any doubts about the merits of that or the credibility of seeking to make up that €75,000 at that particular point? Mr. Tubridy presented "The Late Late Show" and provided a good service. I watched it because it was good viewing right throughout Covid-19. I acknowledge that the performances were great given the circumstances. However, did Mr. Tubridy have any doubts about the credibility or merits of looking for that and about his own credibility?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I appreciate the question and the kind words.

An Cathaoirleach

Mr. Tubridy might give short answers because we want to move on.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I will keep them short. What I am going to be saying a lot today, a Chathaoirligh, is-----

An Cathaoirleach

With regard to that issue, Mr Tubridy.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

With regard to that issue, it is the job of my agent and friend, Mr. Noel Kelly, to get the best deal, as he sees, it for his client and clients.

An Cathaoirleach

On Mr. Tubridy's instructions.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

You could say that, yes, of course.

An Cathaoirleach

It was on Mr. Tubridy's instructions.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

He would absolutely try to get what he considers to be the best deal.

An Cathaoirleach

Did Mr. Tubridy have any doubts in those discussions they had between them back in the earlier part of 2020 around all of this?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

It would be fair to say that-----

An Cathaoirleach

About the merits of it.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

In terms of the financial implications of the commercial side of RTÉ, it probably felt that it was not problematic in that sense.

An Cathaoirleach

That is not what I am asking Mr. Tubridy. Did he have doubts about the public optics of this and the possible reputational damage of looking for that €75,000 in those circumstances? It is a "Yes" or "No" answer. Did he discuss the merits of that? That is all I want to know.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I would say that I would always have doubts about doing too much and getting too much.

An Cathaoirleach

Did Mr. Tubridy discuss that with his agent?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Did we have a conversation about that? It is unlikely. I would say "No".

An Cathaoirleach

Mr. Tubridy is telling me this morning that he had no conversation with NK Management regarding the matter of looking for this gap of €75,000.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

No. To be honest with the Cathaoirleach, I say to Noel "You do your job and I do mine", and that is how it works.

An Cathaoirleach

Mr. Tubridy knew this gap had to be made up and this €75,000 had to be magicked up, for want of a better term, some way or another.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I trust in the process.

An Cathaoirleach

Mr. Tubridy has clarified it. He had no doubts about the merits, credibility or possible reputational damage. That was not discussed.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

That was not discussed, no.

An Cathaoirleach

Okay. I thank Mr. Tubridy. Deputy Munster has 15 minutes.

Deputy Imelda Munster

I wish the witnesses a good morning. I want start off with the tripartite agreement. I ask Mr. Kelly to keep his answers as short as possible. Can he tell us briefly how that came about? What was the reason for it?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I will refer to some of my notes if the Deputy does not mind. How it came about is that it was an RTÉ initiative. Renault was obviously-----

Deputy Imelda Munster

I am sorry; I must interrupt for a second. It was an RTÉ initiative, but it had to stem from somewhere. Mr. Kelly said in his opening statement that Mr. Tubridy was agreeing to a substantial pay cut from RTÉ. Did it come about on the basis of Mr. Kelly negotiating with RTÉ?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, it had no relation.

Deputy Imelda Munster

So how did it come about?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Mr. Tubridy’s contract is for 205 radio shows and 38 two-hour TV shows. This was a totally separate agreement. Renault and RTÉ wanted Mr. Tubridy to do more work around the sponsorship – wanted him to do "The Late Late Show" shows in dealers etc.

Deputy Imelda Munster

Mr. Kelly is seriously saying that it did not come about at all from the pay cuts that Mr. Tubridy was going to take. It was not a way of topping up his salary.

Mr. Noel Kelly

No. The sponsor wanted us to do activity to embellish the sponsorship around the dealers.

Deputy Imelda Munster

Why would RTÉ, off its own bat, be concerned about setting Mr. Kelly’s client up with a commercial deal? Why would it suddenly, at a time when everybody else was asked to take pay cuts, do that? Who in RTÉ came to Mr. Kelly and said “Listen, we want to look after Ryan and set up a separate commercial deal”? Can Mr. Kelly honestly say that he did not initiate that in any shape or form with RTÉ?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Whatsoever.

Deputy Imelda Munster

Then tell us, who in RTÉ came to Mr. Kelly and what did they say?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Referring to page 5 in the pack, under the proposed terms of the new contract, this came from Breda O’Keeffe and was copied to other people as well. They and Renault had wanted Mr. Tubridy to go to the dealers and meet all of their customers. The relationship was between the sponsor and RTÉ. We had nothing to do with that. We do not work with them. The relationship is with RTÉ and it is probably the biggest sponsorship.

Deputy Imelda Munster

RTÉ contacted Mr. Kelly and said “Listen. We are a little bit concerned. Ryan has taken a pay cut. We want to set up a separate deal."

Mr. Noel Kelly

This is nothing about pay cuts. This is a separate commercial deal.

Deputy Imelda Munster

But who came to Mr. Kelly? Was it the director general?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No. It was Breda O'Keeffe.

Deputy Imelda Munster

Breda O’Keeffe came to Mr. Kelly. On page 9 of his documents – the pack he gave us – I think it was Mr. Kelly who stated "we would also need a side letter agreement from RTE to guarantee and underwrite this fee for the duration of this contract and beyond into the next contract". Mr. Kelly sought a guarantee for a deal that he had nothing to do with as such.

Mr. Noel Kelly

The reason I was looking for a guarantee is quite simple. It was never for RTÉ to pay it; it was for if the sponsor changed. We have a five-year contract with RTÉ for 205 radio shows and 38 two-hour TV shows.

Deputy Imelda Munster

We know that. Mr. Kelly said that. Sorry, time is of the essence. Mr. Kelly sought the guarantee that RTÉ would pay if the deal went belly up.

Mr. Noel Kelly

It was never for RTÉ to pay. The guarantee was around if another sponsor came in. Again, the relationship is with RTÉ and the sponsor, not with us. RTÉ would have to talk to the sponsor and ask if they wanted Mr. Tubridy to do something. The sponsor obviously wants to have the host perform different duties for them.

Deputy Imelda Munster

Mr. Kelly did not agree with RTÉ underwriting the deal.

Mr. Noel Kelly

It was not about underwriting; it was about a sponsor change.

Deputy Imelda Munster

At this stage the sponsors were gone and you said-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

The sponsors were still there.

Deputy Imelda Munster

I am talking about the tripartite and years two and three as well. Not only did RTÉ underwrite the Renault contract but also there was an agreement to underwrite the two. Mr. Kelly was looking for a side letter agreement from RTÉ to guarantee and underwrite this for the duration of this contract and beyond into the next contract. Mr. Kelly clearly stated on page 9 of his document that he wanted RTÉ to underwrite. In response to him, Breda O’Keeffe, in her email – I think it is on page 10 of the pack – stated explicitly that on behalf of RTÉ, "we can provide you with a side letter to underwrite this fee for the duration of the contract". Mr. Kelly had requested that they underwrite it and Ms O’Keeffe, in that email on page 10 of the pack, was responding to his request. That is correct.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Imelda Munster

Mr. Kelly stated that Mr. Tubridy was agreeing to a substantial pay cut and he was entitled to seek work elsewhere. That is absolutely fine and nobody has an issue with that.

The problem here is that the deal was underwritten at Mr. Kelly's request for the three years by the public purse.

Mr. Noel Kelly

No.

Deputy Imelda Munster

That is the problem here. The deal was underwritten, at Mr. Kelly's request, for the three years of the contract, and it was paid for by public moneys. That is the issue.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I asked for the deal to be underwritten, because the relationship with the sponsor is with RTÉ. It is not with us.

Deputy Imelda Munster

Underwritten by who? RTÉ?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Imelda Munster

Yes, the public purse.

Mr. Noel Kelly

It is actually about the sponsorship. This was a commercial-----

Deputy Imelda Munster

Mr. Kelly requested that it be underwritten by RTÉ, and that could only mean that RTÉ takes the hit for it and ponies up.

Mr. Noel Kelly

No.

Deputy Imelda Munster

I want to move on, because time is of the essence. Mr. Kelly refers to page 25 in the pack. It is page 6 in his statement. There was an email from the commercial director for the two by three invoices for €75,000 to be raised, and there was an instruction not to put any person's name on it. Mr. Kelly said there was no secret about this deal, but he agreed to not putting a name on that. I presume that Mr. Kelly would agree that there were no consultancy fees, and that there was no consultancy done for the €75,000?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, what we did was act on, at all times, instructions from RTÉ. As I have said, RTÉ is a 100-year-old organisation with auditors and accountants.

Deputy Imelda Munster

Yes, but Mr. Kelly is also a businessman and negotiator-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

We trust the process. Why would one not trust the process?

Deputy Imelda Munster

Mr. Kelly is a businessman and a negotiator, and he looks after his clients. That is his job. There is no issue with that whatsoever. However, Mr. Kelly was instructed not to put names on the invoices - and we are not talking about €2.99 or €3.50, we are talking about invoices for €75,000 - and he knew that he had asked RTÉ to underwrite the agreement. They confirmed that they were underwriting the agreement, they were putting it through the barter account, Mr. Kelly was told not to put a name on it, he knew exactly what it was for, and he did not flag that up. He went along with it, and yet he says there was nothing secret about the deal.

Mr. Noel Kelly

There was nothing secret. We simply acted under instructions from RTÉ.

Deputy Imelda Munster

Yes, but Mr. Kelly knew RTÉ was underwriting the deal, and that it was the €75,000 payment that was due to Mr. Tubridy, but he did not put any-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

We simply acted under instructions from RTÉ.

Deputy Imelda Munster

Yes. That is fair enough. We heard last week that the auditors were not happy, that Grant Thornton was brought in and that at some point, Mr. Kelly was informed of it. When was that, and was it the director general who informed Mr. Kelly, or who and when?

Mr. Noel Kelly

That was 23 May of this year, and that would have been from RTÉ's legal office.

Deputy Imelda Munster

Its legal office, which would have been who exactly?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Somebody from RTÉ's legal office. It was from Ms Paula Mullooly, director of legal affairs, and that was 26 May 2023.

Deputy Imelda Munster

Okay, so RTÉ knew, Grant Thornton knew, and Mr. Kelly knew. Did he tell his client about it?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes, we would have informed our client, of course, but that was the first that we heard about Grant Thornton.

Deputy Imelda Munster

I want to come to Mr. Tubridy. In 2019 - he might have seen this out in the public domain recently - he launched the St. Vincent de Paul Christmas appeal. When he was interviewed, he said that he was haunted by the idea of children in poverty, and the homeless crisis. He also said that he would accept RTÉ's cost-cutting measures graciously, and when it came to this issue, that is not something he has ever been found wanting on. However, here we are three or four years later, and we know that pay cut was subsidised by this deal.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I would not characterise that as a pay cut being subsidised by any deal. I also-----

Deputy Imelda Munster

That is what it looks like. That is what it was-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

With respect, I also urge the Deputy not to conflate somebody being well paid with somebody who might not have a conscience, particularly with the work she mentioned. The Society of St. Vincent de Paul is a charity I have had enormous time for since I was a child.

Deputy Imelda Munster

In fairness, I am sure-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

No, but-----

Deputy Imelda Munster

Sorry, just one second. We are asking questions here.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I appreciate that but under the circumstances I would not like to sully-----

Deputy Imelda Munster

That is absolutely fine.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

-----the work done around the country by those people, for whom I have so much time.

Deputy Imelda Munster

Nobody has mentioned the work those people do. I am referring to what Mr. Tubridy stated, as quoted in the media. That is what I am referring to.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Okay, I apologise.

Deputy Imelda Munster

I accept he does a lot of charity work

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

No, I am not trying to say that. I am not trying to-----

Deputy Imelda Munster

I accept that and there is nobody saying anything otherwise.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I am sorry. I appreciate that. I understood that.

Deputy Imelda Munster

He does that good work. However, at the same time, Mr. Tubridy knew that this separate deal was being done and that it would compensate for the pay cuts. He also knew, and this is the thing, that his agent had requested that RTÉ underwrite that agreement.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Well, I-----

Deputy Imelda Munster

Sorry, I will just get to the question. He knew that the pay deal was going to make softer any pay cut that had been taken but he also knew through his agent that RTÉ was underwriting that deal. He knew that when his colleagues-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

There is a misunderstanding here, honestly.

Mr. Noel Kelly

This was a separate contract-----

Deputy Imelda Munster

No, I am not talking about Renault. I am talking about the tripartite-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

Sorry, this was a separate contract for separate services. It was a separate contract.

An Cathaoirleach

We will allow Mr. Kelly to answer briefly. He should keep it concise.

Mr. Noel Kelly

This was a separate contract for separate services. This had nothing to do with Mr. Tubridy's new contract for radio and TV services. This is a separate contract.

Deputy Imelda Munster

That is what I am talking about. The tripartite deal where the two-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

With RTÉ and Renault as the sponsor.

Deputy Imelda Munster

RTÉ had underwritten that agreement and it was paying it. My question to Mr. Tubridy was-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, Renault was paying it.

Deputy Imelda Munster

But RTÉ paid Renault and then the two €75,000 payments-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

If RTÉ paid Renault, that was an RTÉ thing.

Deputy Imelda Munster

Yes.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Renault paid. If RTÉ paid Renault, that has absolutely nothing to do with us.

Deputy Imelda Munster

That is fine.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I do not work for RTÉ. We do not work for RTÉ. I know the Deputy is trying to clarify here.

Deputy Imelda Munster

I am talking about the two €75,000 payments. We have just discussed it so there is no way the witnesses do not know about the two €75,000 payments that Mr. Kelly was asked not to put any person's name on. They were-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

Again-----

Deputy Imelda Munster

-----underwritten, as has been said, at his request.

An Cathaoirleach

Is the question being directed at Mr. Tubridy?

Deputy Imelda Munster

Yes, it is being directed at Mr. Tubridy.

An Cathaoirleach

Then I ask Mr. Kelly to please not interrupt.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

To clarify, the reason Mr. Kelly is coming in on this is because his knowledge of the nuts and bolts of these things is far superior to mine. I am not being disrespectful to the Deputy by not answering.

Deputy Imelda Munster

No, and that is fair enough, and likewise. However, I am asking Mr. Tubridy again on that. He said that child poverty haunts him, and that is perfectly understandable.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I stand by that.

Deputy Imelda Munster

Of course. However, where does that tally with the fact that Mr. Tubridy knew that two payments were going through for €75,000? The tripartite agreement was struck. He knew those payments were for himself as part of that tripartite agreement but he would have also known that RTÉ had agreed to underwrite that agreement. Therefore, in fact it was the taxpayers, the licence fee holders, who were paying that money; it was not the commercial fee.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

As I understood it, there was a relationship with Renault that would sort that out.

Deputy Imelda Munster

No. We are talking about the second and third one.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Yes, but am I not right in saying that about the second and third one?

Deputy Imelda Munster

With all respect, no.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

There seems to be a misunderstanding.

Deputy Imelda Munster

No, there is no misunderstanding. We have sat through three weeks of it, in all fairness.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I appreciate that.

Deputy Imelda Munster

There is no misunderstanding from our side.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I am misunderstanding, obviously; I apologise.

Deputy Imelda Munster

There is no misunderstanding. We are talking about the two €75,000 payments. If Mr. Tubridy prefers not to answer, that is fine.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

No, I am happy to answer but I was always under the impression that the money was from Renault.

Mr. Noel Kelly

From Renault, exactly.

Deputy Imelda Munster

Mr. Tubridy received €345,000 extra in payments that was underwritten by RTÉ, so the taxpayer paid.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I really dispute that.

An Cathaoirleach

Okay. We are going to move on. We have to keep moving because we have full attendance here.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I thank Deputy Munster.

An Cathaoirleach

I call Deputy Ó Cathasaigh.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

I thank the witnesses for attending and for their opening statements. I know Mr. Tubridy is fond of a small quirky fact that tells a story. I am sure he knows as well that 79% of us listen to radio daily here in Ireland, despite everything else that is open to us, from Spotify to podcasts. Like most people, we are big radio listeners in our house and Mr. Tubridy was in our kitchen five mornings a week.

That is the thing. He was that familiar voice in our kitchen. When he told us during Covid in particular, and I am sure during the recessions, that we were all in it together we believed him. That is why we feel so shattered by this story now. Mr. Tubridy has set out a strong rebuttal. It is clear that RTÉ, when they appear before us again on Thursday, will have a serious set of questions to answer. The fact remains, rightly or wrongly, that public trust in our public broadcaster and in Mr. Tubridy has been shattered. Maybe today is a start, but we will see.

I have one quick question. Is it true that Mr. Tubridy engaged the services of an internal or external crisis communications team before appearing today?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

We assembled a team of people to talk with and to get the best advice. I was always told by a relative of mine to always surround yourself with people smarter than you, so yes of course we spoke to people.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

Were people paid to offer crisis communications advice, either internal or external?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I of course presume they were not doing it for free.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

We will take that as "Yes." I hope the answer to my next question is "No," but was Mr. Tubridy advised by those people to delay the documentation until 8.30 a.m. this morning?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

No. I apologise for that. The documentation-----

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

It is a comprehensive set of documentation. It sheds a lot of light on a huge amount of things-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Does the Deputy want me to come back on that.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

-----but it was received at 8.30 a.m. The staff who support this committee stayed up until very late last night got up very early this morning.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I apologise. Does the Deputy want me to come back on that or would he rather keep going?

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

Briefly, if he could.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

The past three weeks have been chaotic. They have been destructive. They have been beyond difficult. All I will say to the Deputy is that we wanted to get things right today, because so many people have been getting things wrong.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

I fully accept and I do not want to interrupt, but I have one eye to the clock.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Hence, we were working on this burning the midnight oil.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

I want to examine one thing in Mr. Tubridy's opening statement. He states clearly that he took a 20% pay cut. Is that inclusive or exclusive of the €75,000 he was receiving either from Renault, or from RTÉ through a barter account? When Mr. Tubridy says he took a 20% pay cut, is that inclusive or exclusive of the €75,000.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Mr. Kelly will take that.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I will answer that. The 20% was that Mr. Tubridy's contract was €495,000, €495,000, €545,000, €545,000 and €545,000. That was-----

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

Is the 20% referred to the direct payment from RTÉ?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I will explain the percentage. That was from 2015 to 2019. In Mr. Tubridy's next contract, his salary was €440,000 per annum. That was €200,000 for radio, and €240,000 for television. That was a €105,000 reduction per year multiplied by five. That was €525,000. It did not include the €120,000 he did not take, and the Renault €75,000 was a completely separate contract. This was on his television and radio earnings.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

It is exclusive of the Renault contract or the payment through RTÉ by the barter account.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

I have to contest that we regard this as separate. The email over and back that we see in the contract negotiations are shocking to all of the members for a number of reasons. The first is the number of people who are included, and Mr. Kelly has drawn attention to that.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

It also points clearly to the fact that it is not separate. It is part of the RTÉ contract.

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, it is not part of the RTÉ contract.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

If it were entirely separate, why would RTÉ be involved in it?

Mr. Noel Kelly

RTÉ came to us with this. At all times, everything to do with this contract was under instruction from RTÉ, but the contract and the payments were with Renault, the sponsor. Renault is still the sponsor of "The Late Late Show."

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

I asked the question of Mr. Tubridy and it was in his opening statement. That is exclusive of the €75,000. Would he accept it is difficult for us to reconcile the idea that this was an entirely separate arrangement, when it formed part of the contract negotiations?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I understand entirely where the Deputy is coming from. I understand the room for perception issues.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

Okay. I want to move on to Mr. Kelly's part in this. I think it is important to put to bed any idea that Mr. Tubridy made any decision about "The Late Late Show" on foot of this.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Sure.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

We know the two problematic invoices were presented to Dee Forbes on 8 March. Whenever Mr. Tubridy took his decision he announced it on 16 March. Would Mr. Kelly have Dee Forbes's telephone number in his phone?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

No.

Mr. Noel Kelly

If I can explain, there are so many untruths, I find it bizarre.

I have only ever met Dee Forbes with her legal team in their office in RTÉ. I have never had a cup of tea with Dee Forbes. I have never met Dee Forbes for lunch. I have never met her for dinner. I do not know Dee Forbes apart from when I would meet her in RTÉ-----

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

I am sorry - we are so time-compressed here.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

If the Deputy has a question with regard to my departure from the "The Late Late Show", that was so deeply personal and so deeply from my heart, I urge him to ask me about that because-----

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

I want to ask a very simple question and it sounds like Mr. Tubridy would welcome the opportunity. Was there any communication to Mr. Tubridy or NK Management between 8 March and 16 March regarding these problematic invoices?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

No.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

That is fine.

Mr. Noel Kelly

The first indication was on 23 May.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

I do want to contest that because between 3 May and 5 May, there is an over and back-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

Sorry, when we met with Grant Thornton-----

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

-----between Paula Mullooly and NK Management where specific reference is made to the Century Merchandising Services, CMS, invoices.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

I do want to ask Mr. Kelly about the decision to use CMS. I want to contest that because there is certainly an over and back between NK Management

Mr. Noel Kelly

Sorry - on 3 May-----

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

-----and Paula Mullooly.

Mr. Noel Kelly

There is just a lot of emails. We were first made aware of it on 3 May and after that, we met with Grant Thornton to talk to them about it. In relation to Mr. Tubridy stepping down or stepping back, he had said it to me the previous year and I said to him "Why? Why are you leaving?" and he-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

So did my family. They thought I was mad.

Mr. Noel Kelly

To be honest, a very good friend of ours said, "Ryan, why are you leaving? Stay on the "Late Late". It is a great show". I knew after Covid when you are playing to no audience that it was a really difficult show to do and when he said-----

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

I am so sorry to interrupt Mr. Kelly and I do not want to come across as hectoring but I have two minutes remaining and a list of questions as long as your arm.

Mr. Noel Kelly

We had been aware of this for quite a while and I was trying to get him to stay.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

On the invoicing, I noticed in the accounts that were returned at the end of the year that in respect of money transferred to Tuttle Productions, it can essentially be seen in the normal run of a year that the amount derived from NK Management is quite small and that in the years in question, it was large. The €75,000 can be seen. Mr. Kelly has four companies that are registered out of Unit 2b, Calmount Office Park, Ballymount: NK Management; Noel Kelly Management Nominees Limited, which was registered on 16 March 2023; Century Merchandising Services, CMS, Limited; and Cleary Consultancy Limited. Why was it CMS that decided to raise the invoice?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Because I have two companies - NK Management and CMS - and we were asked by RTÉ to send the invoice in from CMS.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

Why CMS?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Those were RTÉ's instructions.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

It is NK Management that appears at the end of year.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Sure, but we own CMS as well. It is a sister company.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

Mr. Kelly has no explanation for why NK Management above CMS. It just adds a layer of opacity because I know what NK Management is but I do not know what CMS is.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Again, we were directed by RTÉ.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

With this direction from RTÉ, we have all received emails saying, "All you have to do is invoice a certain company in wherever and all of this money will be yours." It concerns an invoice for €75,000 to a company Mr. Kelly says he does not know and has never come across. He has no reason to suspect RTÉ is hiding payments but it asked him to invoice this company to receive a payment and he did not say, "I'm sorry but who is this company and why am I invoicing them?"

Mr. Noel Kelly

RTÉ has, say, 1,800 employees and turns over €350 million. We are a small little company. There are eight of us. We are a small company-----

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

The context of this is that Mr. Kelly has been upset about the recording of earnings beforehand.

Mr. Noel Kelly

We were asked under instruction to do this and that is what we did.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Can I say something briefly? Am I allowed?

An Cathaoirleach

Briefly.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

The Deputy was listening to my radio show during the week-----

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

It was my missus, unfortunately. I am up here. My missus listens regularly.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

The Deputy's wife or his partner.

I thank him for saying that. I am sorry to hear that she feels that way about the programme but I can assure him that this is what today is all about - rebuilding the trust that may have been undermined by a lot of misunderstanding.

Deputy Colm Burke

I thank the witnesses for coming before the committee voluntarily. It is very much appreciated. I will follow on from my colleague.

Century Merchandising Services Limited is CMS.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Colm Burke

When I searched the Companies Registration Office, CRO, register I found that all the CMS companies had been struck off, so I am a little concerned about the witnesses using those letters when the CRO showed all companies called CMS had been struck off the register. It is trading under Century Merchandising Services Limited. That is CMS.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes. CMS is just the-----

Deputy Colm Burke

I know, but for clarity, all the companies registered under the name CMS have been struck off for various reasons.

I will ask a question on the contracts. The contract between RTÉ and Tuttle Productions Limited is the five-year agreement.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Colm Burke

However, the agreement that was drafted by the witnesses is between Renault Ireland Limited, RTÉ and Ryan Tubridy. Tuttle Productions Limited is not a party. Is there a reason for that?

Mr. Noel Kelly

The Renault contract, on page 5-----

Deputy Colm Burke

I have a copy of the agreement.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Sure.

Deputy Colm Burke

This is the contract that was prepared in relation to the agreement between the three organisations, but it is not with Tuttle Productions.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes. The agreement was written by RTÉ legal.

Deputy Colm Burke

No, the one I have is-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

Sorry, it is for the services. On the services, we had numerous meetings with Renault about the activity. Part of the confusion is that the events were to take place in 2021 and 2022.

Deputy Colm Burke

The agreement is with a separate legal entity to the agreement between Tuttle Productions Limited and RTÉ. This agreement is between Ryan Tubridy, Renault and RTÉ.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes, Ryan Tubridy being Tuttle Productions Limited.

Deputy Colm Burke

Did the €75,000 go into the Tuttle Productions Limited account?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Colm Burke

The invoice that was produced, which I think-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

We would invoice it and then it would be-----

Deputy Colm Burke

The invoice NK Management produced does not mention Tuttle Productions Limited. It mentions Ryan Tubridy. It does not mention Tuttle Productions Limited at all. It is on page 24.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Absolutely. It is on page 24. We were directed again by RTÉ legal to put down:

Ryan Tubridy

Bespoke Partnership between Renault Ireland and Ryan Tubridy to included personal appearances.

Programme of activity...

Deputy Colm Burke

If the agreement is ongoing with Tuttle Productions Limited, why was the invoice sent out in a person's name?

Mr. Noel Kelly

The agreement was with Renault and RTÉ, and Mr. Tubridy is the service provider. We invoice on behalf of Mr. Tubridy and then-----

Deputy Colm Burke

From a legal point of view, there seem to be two different legal entities, namely Tuttle Productions Limited and Ryan Tubridy.

Mr. Noel Kelly

No. It is just Ryan Tubridy.

Mr. Noel Kelly

That is what the agreements show.

Mr. Noel Kelly

That is the Renault and Ryan Tubridy invoice. There is only Tuttle Productions Limited, which is Ryan Tubridy's company.

Deputy Colm Burke

I will move on to the invoices. When NK Management noticed that it was invoicing a company based in the UK, did Mr. Kelly not raise serious concerns about that issue? Obviously, if the invoice is made out to a UK company, then NK Management is not putting in for VAT or anything else, yet the service was delivered in Ireland.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Again under instructions from RTÉ, we drew up the invoice-----

Deputy Colm Burke

In fairness, NK Management is a separate legal entity to RTÉ. Should it not have asked further questions about that?

Mr. Noel Kelly

We sent the invoices in to RTÉ.

Deputy Colm Burke

Yes, but when NK Management was asked to send in the invoices, it was asked to make them out to a UK company. Did that not raise concerns from its point of view as regards ensuring the company was not doing anything, particularly where the service was delivered in Ireland? The service was not delivered in the UK. It was delivered through RTÉ to Renault and not to a UK company.

Mr. Noel Kelly

We knew that the contract was with Renault and that it was a separate contract for independent contractor services. Mr. Tubridy had to do work with RTÉ and we understood that he would have to do extra work with Renault but there was no difference-----

An Cathaoirleach

That is not the question. Mr. Kelly is going completely off the question Deputy Burke is trying to ask. I ask the Deputy to put the question straight again. It is a direct question and I ask Mr. Kelly to give a concise answer to it.

Deputy Colm Burke

When the invoice was made out, it was made out to a UK company.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Colm Burke

I am saying that the service was delivered in Ireland-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Colm Burke

-----for Irish companies, RTÉ and Renault in Ireland. Did it not raise concerns with Mr. Kelly and Mr. Tubridy from an accounting point of view that they were being asked to bill a UK company? They said in their statements that they knew nothing about the barter account, they had never dealt with a barter account before and that this was their first time dealing with one. Did they not raise questions as to why the invoice should be made out to a UK company?

Mr. Noel Kelly

At the time, we did not know what Astus was.

Deputy Colm Burke

Was it not more reason for raising a question if Mr. Kelly did not know about it?

Mr. Noel Kelly

We presumed it had a relationship with Renault. We followed the instructions exactly and subsequently got paid by Astus.

Deputy Colm Burke

Did Mr. Kelly ask Renault if this was the reason and if this was the connection, rather than sending it in? Remember, it was RTÉ that was giving Mr. Kelly the instructions, not Renault. Therefore, should Mr. Kelly not have raised that question?

Mr. Noel Kelly

We did not raise the question because we acted under instruction from RTÉ.

Deputy Colm Burke

Paragraph 2.2(g) of the Grant Thornton report raises the fact that: "The Director General was not involved in the drafting, signing or implementation of this agreement (being the Tri-partite)." It seems that we are being furnished with certain names but we are not being given all of the names. I am wondering who exactly was there who knew about all of this agreement. Mr. Kelly was involved but who in RTÉ was there who was involved in this agreement?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Trish Whelan from legal, Breda O'Keeffe from finance, the CEO, Dee Forbes, and somebody on the executive board.

Deputy Colm Burke

The Grant Thornton report says: "The Director General was not involved in the drafting, signing or implementation of this agreement".

Mr. Noel Kelly

The drafting, signing and implementation would have involved legal, finance and commercial.

Deputy Colm Burke

Can Mr. Kelly tell us who was there from legal, financial and commercial?

Mr. Noel Kelly

It was the RTÉ solicitor's office.

Deputy Colm Burke

Mr. Kelly is saying the commercial people were there as well. We need to know who exactly was there because this information is not being given to us. Mr. Kelly was there or someone from his office was there.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I refer to page 14 of the document pack. I was there, along with Niamh, Breda O'Keeffe and Katrina Faughnan from the RTÉ solicitor's office.

Deputy Colm Burke

Who?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Katrina Faughnan.

Deputy Colm Burke

Is she from the solicitor's office?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes, she is from RTÉ's office.

Deputy Colm Burke

Was there anyone else there?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Trish Whelan from the solicitor's office was there as well.

Deputy Colm Burke

I want to move on to Mr. Tubridy. My colleague raised the issue of the level of fees and when I looked at Mr. Tubridy's accounts I saw that in 2016 the income through the accounts was €660,000. I accept that there has been a reduction in what he is receiving. With all of this controversy, there is now a problem in the entire country, and within RTÉ, with trust and the ethics of this. Looking at it now, how does Mr. Tubridy feel this trust can be rebuilt? What is Mr. Tubridy's preference as regards going back to work for RTÉ?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I do not have any doubt. I want to go back to work on the radio as soon as possible. I do not say that with any arrogance; I just say it out of expressed desire. It is what I do and know. I want to get back to my team and the listeners and do my job because it is all I have got.

Deputy Colm Burke

What about the issue of trust?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I understand that. I understand the amount of money we are talking about is eye-watering.

I am not a fool. I understand that, but I have not changed as a person over those years despite the extraordinary bank balance.

Deputy Colm Burke

The question I am asking Mr. Tubridy is this: how does he now rebuild that trust?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

A lot of the trust was taken from me. I believe-----

Deputy Colm Burke

How do we now rebuild the trust, first of all if Mr. Tubridy goes back into RTÉ, secondly the trust in RTÉ itself-----

An Cathaoirleach

The Deputy is going over time.

Deputy Colm Burke

-----and thirdly building the trust with his own colleagues?

An Cathaoirleach

I ask for a brief answer.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I will just say that they are off to a good start this week with the new director general. Hopefully, people will see and hear what I am saying today and they will realise that, in a lot of what has happened over the last three weeks, I have been dragged into a mess not of my own making.

Deputy Colm Burke

With your colleagues?

An Cathaoirleach

I call Deputy Devlin.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

With my colleagues? The only thing I have for my colleagues is respect.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

I thank our witnesses for their attendance this morning.

Such is the issue surrounding this that Mr. Tubridy is right about people stopping him. Obviously, we are living in the same area and I know the high regard in which Mr. Tubridy is held and the respect people have for him, including kids who are wondering why the toy man is being in the news so much. That said, given the events over the last two weeks - we have engaged with RTÉ on quite a number of occasions - has that been the reason Mr. Tubridy wanted to come here voluntarily? Does the reason have more to do with what he heard from those engagements with RTÉ and what the various executives and board members said, or has it been everything else surrounding this whole issue? What is the main driver of Mr. Tubridy wanting to be here?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I think that my name has been desperately sullied. I think my reputation has been sullied. I am deeply upset. I am hurt. It is hard to leave the house, if the Deputy really wants me to be honest about it. For what? I spent three weeks watching people telling stories, and-----

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Just on-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Sorry, I am leaving a gap. Forgive me; it is a comma, not a full stop. I am not looking for sympathy now or a violin. I am simply responding to the question asked by the Deputy. He brought up the kids. My relationship with the children of Ireland is so important to me. I know that sounds grandiose, but actually it is. I want them to be happy, hopeful and proud to be Irish, to read lots of books and to be wonderful young people. That does not change, but what has been happening in the last three weeks is like a frenzy.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Can I specifically ask Mr. Tubridy about what he has heard? Maybe Mr. Kelly would like to come in on this as well. I presume they watched all of the evidence that has been given to both Oireachtas committees over the last couple of weeks.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Yes.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Even in Mr. Tubridy's statement, he referred to it as "a fog of confusion". To me, it is a cloud of confusion at this point because what he is saying now directly contradicts what this committee and others have been told over the past couple of weeks by certain individuals. That is extremely worrying, both from a parliamentary perspective but also from a fact and truthful perspective, bearing in mind, referring to Mr. Kelly's statement, that RTÉ is an "institution" of the Irish State and those representing it.

I will turn to a few elements. The first is the question around Mr. Tubridy's decision. Mr. Tubridy said he had been thinking about it long and hard. Obviously, I can appreciate why it would be such a big decision.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Yes.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Is there any evidence? It is not that I doubt what Mr. Tubridy has said about when he made his decision-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Please do not.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

-----but, for clarity in terms of the public domain, is there is any correspondence predating-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

This scandal.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

-----April or May? Yes.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

The RTÉ scandal?

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Is there anything between the two of them? It is not that I want it published but I just want to clear the record. Is there anything - text messages, emails or anything - that says that this is coming up?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Sorry, we asked to come here today.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

I understand that.

Mr. Noel Kelly

We asked to come here today. We were not invited; we asked. I have never seen such horrendous reporting as over the last three weeks. Why, suddenly, was the most trusted man in Ireland, Ryan Tubridy, thrown under a bus? Why? When the first report came out, which was sent out from the board on 22-----

Deputy Cormac Devlin

This is the statement.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes, the statement. We had to ask our lawyers if we could get a copy. Again, we are on the back foot. When RTÉ sent out the top ten earners, again, we get ten minutes.

Again, I had to put in a request for the information. When we got the statement, half an hour before it went out, we said there were inaccuracies in it. Grant Thornton said there was no wrongdoing on behalf of Ryan Tubridy and Noel Kelly and everything was in order. We asked them to put that in, and they did not. Four days later, it was put in, and four days later, Ryan Tubridy was taken off the air. He did not have his show on the Friday and he was not on the show the following week. It looked like he was complicit in this whole RTÉ mess. I am sorry but this has been the worst of times.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

I appreciate that. I know that is why you are here.

Mr. Noel Kelly

It is exactly why we are here.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I would like to add that people have families.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

People need to think about that. You are a public representative, so you know what it means when you are in the middle of something. You get that. This is not my first rodeo being in the public eye, but I have never seen anything like it. I do not know if any of you have been cancelled before, but let me tell you, you do not want to be there.

(Interruptions).

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Okay. We can talk about that later.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

In terms of the physical and oral statements made in the Houses of the Oireachtas, one of the inaccuracies that Mr. Tubridy has alluded to concerns the secret overpayment by RTÉ, which he said he challenged back in 2020. Was that challenge in writing?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

It is in the documents.

Mr. Noel Kelly

It is in the documents.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

There are a lot of documents.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I appreciate that.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I appreciate that there are a lot of documents. That is why we have been working on this for so long. It is just to make sure-----

Deputy Cormac Devlin

It is in writing. That is all I wanted to establish.

Mr. Noel Kelly

We have it in writing and we went back and actually asked them.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

I also want to get a timeframe in terms of the negotiation of Mr. Tubridy's first contract. Did those negotiations start in 2014?

Mr. Noel Kelly

The negotiations for the 2015 contract would have started probably at the end of 2014.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

The end of 2014. That contract ran to 2020 and then there were fresh negotiations around the contract.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

When did the negotiations start for the Renault contract?

Mr. Noel Kelly

They would have run in parallel with the 2020 contract, so negotiations would have started in probably late 2019 or so.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Mr. Kelly can see where the cloud or fog of confusion arises when people say that the two contracts are running parallel and one had a 20% pay cut and the other had a supplement.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Sure. Can I just answer, please?

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Briefly, please, because I am under time pressure.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I know but the Deputy asked me a question. As I said, within that timeframe, we had agreed that the €120,000 would be gone and the €525,000 would not be invoiced. We did not go out printing that. I appreciate what the Deputy is saying about the fog of confusion. There is so much confusion.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Try sitting where we are sitting.

Mr. Noel Kelly

The Deputy is finding he is confused. We have been so confused by everything that has come out in the last number of weeks.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

In terms of the invoicing, I hear what Mr. Kelly says. He did what he was told.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes, absolutely.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

There is an email in the pack provided and he mentioned all the information on the invoice. I think Astus is the name of the company he was told to invoice from.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Did he ever meet any representatives from Astus?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Was this just a new company that he was told to invoice?

Mr. Noel Kelly

It was a company that we were told to invoice.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

That was not really questioned at all, on Mr. Kelly's part either.

Mr. Noel Kelly

No.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

So if RTÉ had asked him to pay Newstalk, would he have done that too?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, it is-----

Deputy Cormac Devlin

I am being facetious because Mr. Kelly was negotiating with RTÉ on a contract and he was told to invoice a different company he had never heard of. How did that come about and how come there was no questioning of it?

Mr. Noel Kelly

That came from RTÉ.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

I get that.

Mr. Noel Kelly

The instruction was from RTÉ.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Why was there not a question about who was being invoiced? Mr. Kelly was negotiating with RTÉ and now he was invoicing Joe Bloggs.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I have worked personally with RTÉ for 23 years. I would never have questioned working with RTÉ.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Did it ever ask him to invoice a company he had never heard of?

Mr. Noel Kelly

We had never done a roadshow like this before. It was the first time.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

No, in the negotiations-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

I assumed it was Renault.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

On the Zoom call of 7 May-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

With Dee Forbes and RTÉ lawyers.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Were they the solicitors that Mr. Kelly spoke about, Trish Whelan and-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

There were three representatives from RTÉ at the meeting, two from the solicitor's office and then the DG.

Mr. Noel Kelly

There was one from the solicitor's office, the DG, me and a colleague of mine.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

There was a colleague of Mr. Kelly's on his side.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

In the last minute or so that I have, I want to ask about Toy Show, The Musical. We have heard a lot about it. We have heard there was a €2.2 million loss. I know Mr. Kelly was not directly involved but is an agent acting on behalf of Mr. Tubridy. Mr. Tubridy works, or worked, with RTÉ.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Can I please answer that?

Mr. Noel Kelly

We have not got to the question yet.

Were staff from "The Late Late Show" seconded to the musical, be it production staff or other personnel from RTÉ directly working on Toy Show, The Musical.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Toy Show, The Musical was something I had nothing to do with.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Is Mr. Tubridy aware of anybody who was-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

It is only fair to say the Deputy should put those questions to the people in RTÉ about that.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

We have.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

In fairness, that was not my-----

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Mr. Tubridy was not aware of any staff who were seconded from RTÉ to Toy Show, The Musical.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

No, there might have been people working in parallel but “secondment” is probably too strong a word.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

Okay. I want to ask Mr. Tubridy, given he is probably, as was said earlier, the face of this issue-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

That has been unfortunate.

Deputy Cormac Devlin

In terms of everything Mr. Tubridy has heard from his former colleagues in RTÉ - directors and executives - what has been the biggest inaccuracy that he has heard? I know he has highlighted seven but is there any one in particular that he wants to highlight this afternoon?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I think seven is quite enough.

Deputy John Brady

I welcome our witnesses. Hopefully, this meeting will go some way towards getting transparency, which has been missing until this point. I want to establish a clear timeline as to who knew what and when. We know that on 3 March, Mr. Tubridy had stated, when questioned about his ongoing position with “The Late Late Show” and whether he would continue or not:

I don’t know where this is coming from, the story comes up every year or two. I am here talking to you today with a view to go straight back into the job I love.

Is that correct?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I know exactly what the Deputy is talking about. In fact, I remember well that interview. I can fill him in on all of the details he wants when he wants.

Deputy John Brady

There is no need to. That is accurate for 3 March. On 7 March, we know from questioning that Deloitte first contacted Richard Collins, the chief financial officer. That has been established and it is not disputed. We know Mr. Collins on 8 March contacted Dee Forbes to get to the bottom of the nature of those two invoices that we know had been issued, and that is not up for dispute. It was stated that a meeting took place between Mr. Kelly and someone within RTÉ in the week beginning 6 March of this year. Does Mr. Kelly recall meeting someone?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No. As I said, the only meetings I had with Ms Forbes were in the RTÉ boardroom with her, her lawyers and her accountants, and we had a Zoom call. That was it.

Deputy John Brady

Okay. It was stated that Mr. Kelly met with Alan Tyler from RTÉ the week beginning 6 March.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I have no recollection of that.

Deputy John Brady

Mr. Kelly has no recollection of that. Okay. When did Mr. Tubridy notify RTÉ that he was going to-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

I am sorry - Alan Tyler.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

You thought it was somebody else.

Mr. Noel Kelly

The Deputy may want to go back to that question first. This is Alan Tyler, the new head of entertainment.

Deputy John Brady

Yes. On what date did Mr. Kelly meet him?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I would have met with him quite a few times when he started.

Deputy John Brady

What date in March?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I am not really sure.

Deputy John Brady

What was the purpose of that meeting?

An Cathaoirleach

To be helpful, if Mr. Kelly has his diary with him, he could check that during the break.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I am sorry, I actually do not.

An Cathaoirleach

You could have somebody check it during the break. We will be breaking for ten minutes.

Deputy John Brady

It would be important that we establish when Mr. Kelly met with him in March. It was stated it was 6 March and I think it is important.

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, it was the 13 March that-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Can I ask the Deputy: what is the question?

Deputy John Brady

I am just wondering when Mr. Kelly met with Mr. Tyler.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

We will find that out for him during the break.

Deputy John Brady

When did Mr. Tubridy inform RTÉ that he was stepping down?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Noel, on my behalf, informed RTÉ on 13 March.

Deputy John Brady

13 March.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

That is right.

Deputy John Brady

Okay. On the same day, Mr. Tubridy announced publicly that he was going to be stepping back from “The Late Late Show”.

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, that was-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

The Deputy is talking about that interview a few weeks before where I was at an event. Does the Deputy want me to go into this?

Deputy John Brady

No. Mr. Tubridy stated publicly on 16 March that he was going to be stepping back. When did he notify RTÉ of his decision?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

My apologies. It was 13 March to RTÉ and 16 March to the public.

Deputy John Brady

Had anyone in RTÉ notified Mr. Tubridy or Mr. Kelly-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

No.

Deputy John Brady

-----of the concerns that Deloitte highlighted?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Can I answer? I really must, I have to, because we can be here until the last-----

Deputy John Brady

Yes or no, because time is unfortunately against us. Yes or no, did anyone from RTÉ-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I need a little time too, forgive me. I will be here until the last dog barks, until the Deputy believes me that that decision came from my heart and soul. The kernel of that decision was last August. We can talk about timelines and dates and Grant Thornton and everything else-----

Deputy John Brady

Yes or no, did anyone from RTÉ-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

This was a very personal decision.

Deputy John Brady

Can Mr. Tubridy answer the question? Did anyone from RTÉ contact either Mr. Tubridy or Mr. Kelly about the review that Deloitte had-----?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Not until May. I was the one who went in to inform them-----

Deputy John Brady

The tripartite agreement was not signed until 21 April 2023, a month and a half after the issue was first identified by Deloitte. Why was that only signed at that stage?

Mr. Noel Kelly

That was because the agreement originally was supposed to be for 2020 and the first lot of events. Then there was Covid-19, and it went to 2021 and that was affected by Covid-19 so finally in 2022 we did the first number of events. As a result it was not signed.

Deputy John Brady

We are expected to believe it is purely coincidental that a month and a half after Deloitte identified these questionable invoices that this was taken down off the shelf when everything had hit the fan and retrospectively signed a couple of years after the contract took place?

Mr. Noel Kelly

If I can just answer, the invoices were sent to RTÉ. It sent them to Astus. We were working on-----

Deputy John Brady

I want to ask about this tripartite agreement. Is it purely coincidental that was taken down off the shelf and signed in April, a month and a half after Deloitte raised these concerns?

Mr. Noel Kelly

The three parties in the agreement are Renault, RTÉ and we were in a separate agreement just to provide services. I want to make that clear. The services were-----

Deputy John Brady

So it was a coincidence?

Mr. Noel Kelly

It is actually more of a what will happen, who will be there-----

Deputy John Brady

I am not getting a clear answer.

Mr. Noel Kelly

It is an operational thing really.

Deputy John Brady

Mr. Kelly is leading us to believe it was pure coincidence that it was signed in April, a month after Deloitte raised these issues and a number of years after the contract came about. Can I just ask, in regard to-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

On 18 April, page 35 in the pack reads: Niamh, thank you for calling this morning. In the email below, the sum I mentioned refers to the third side letter which we do not seem to have on file. We do not seem to have a fully signed copy with Renault. We signed the letter.

We were not concealing any issue. It was just a Renault-----

Deputy John Brady

In regard to the commercial contract, Mr. Kelly said it was Breda O'Keeffe who came up with the idea of this commercial contract.

Mr. Noel Kelly

She put it forward first.

Deputy John Brady

Is that a normal thing or would this be unusual in terms of negotiating on behalf of-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

To be honest, that is an RTÉ thing. I do not know how-----

Deputy John Brady

Okay, for the people Mr. Kelly represents, would it be normal that RTÉ would put forward proposals for a commercial element to be part of the contract? Would that be normal, or an exception?

Mr. Noel Kelly

It would be exceptional and this is exceptional because Mr. Tubridy, as the host of "The Late Late Show" and Renault as the sponsor of "The Late Late Show" and the "The Late Late Show" being owned by RTÉ, it is unique.

Deputy John Brady

It is an exception. Are there no other cases involving any other people?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No.

Deputy John Brady

There are no other cases. In regard to the invoicing, we know there was an attempt, and a trail is there, that no names were to appear on the invoices. Whose suggestion was it to label them as consultancy fees?

Mr. Noel Kelly

RTÉ's.

Deputy John Brady

Who in RTÉ informed Mr. Kelly to put it down as consultancy fees?

Mr. Noel Kelly

It was Geraldine O'Leary.

Deputy John Brady

Okay, in the Grant Thornton review it states very clearly that no consultancy fees were provided either by the talent or the talent's agents and it did not reflect the substance of the transactions.

The then chief financial officer, under questioning last week in regard to the legality of these invoices, stated it was his view that the public had been defrauded because of the labelling of these invoices. Mr. Kelly clearly followed the instructions of Ms Geraldine O'Leary in order to, I would suggest, purposefully confuse the true nature of the invoices and what was being billed for. Would he agree with the former chief financial officer that the public was, potentially, defrauded because of the issuing of these invoices by him and the payment by RTÉ of the two €75,000 sums?

Mr. Noel Kelly

At all times we were acting under instruction from RTÉ, as I have stated.

Deputy John Brady

Would Mr. Kelly agree with the former chief financial officer that the taxpayer was, potentially, defrauded given no consultancy fees had been provided?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Again, this was under instruction from RTÉ. It is an RTÉ question.

Deputy John Brady

Who issued the invoices to RTÉ?

Mr. Noel Kelly

We sent invoices to RTÉ, which RTÉ then sent on to Astus.

Deputy John Brady

NK Management issued invoices labelled as consultancy fees-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

We acted under instruction.

Deputy John Brady

-----knowing that no consultancy fees had been provided.

Mr. Noel Kelly

We acted under instruction from RTÉ at all times.

An Cathaoirleach

We can agree to suspend briefly now or take one further member's questions.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I am happy to do whatever suits members.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Let us take a break.

An Cathaoirleach

Okay, we will suspend for ten minutes.

Sitting suspended at 12.32 p.m. and resumed at 12.44 p.m.

An Cathaoirleach

We will resume. In relation to checking the diary for the date of that meeting, as well as checking which members from RTÉ were present, did Mr. Kelly clarify that during the break?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes. There was a meeting with Alan Tyler and Jim Jennings, who is the head of programming content. Alan Tyler is head of entertainment. We had a meeting-----

An Cathaoirleach

What was the date?

Mr. Noel Kelly

It was 6 March.

An Cathaoirleach

It was 6 March. I thank Mr. Kelly. The next committee member is Deputy Verona Murphy.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Was the topic of Grant Thornton brought up Mr. Kelly?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, the topic was issues around the timings of “The Late Late Show” and when it would start.

During Covid, "The Late Late Show" finished at 11 p.m., so the issues were around-----

Deputy Verona Murphy

I do not mean to cut Mr. Kelly off, but is he categorically stating that there was a discussion?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Sorry. It was very much about issues around "The Late Late Show" and trying to finish it earlier, etc.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Okay. I thank Mr. Kelly. It seems a bit odd that they would have been having that discussion given Mr. Tubridy's resignation. Was it just for the remaining shows?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, it was before. It was not related to it.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Okay.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Maybe Mr. Tubridy wants to talk about it.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

No.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Was Mr. Tubridy at that meeting?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Yes, I was.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Okay, so it had nothing to do with it, as Mr. Kelly was categorically saying. There was no discussion.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Like I said in my opening statement, it is one of the untruths I really wanted to clear up here. There was no, no, no connection between this fiasco and my departure from "The Late Late Show". I promise you that.

Deputy Verona Murphy

You will have watched all the previous engagements. For a start, I would like to say you are welcome here.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Thank you for that.

Deputy Verona Murphy

It is nice you came without having to be compelled.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I appreciate that.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Thank you.

Deputy Verona Murphy

It is not that anybody knows how to address you because everybody feels they know you, so-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I know. I would prefer if you called me "Ryan", but I understand that is not the nature of it.

Deputy Verona Murphy

It is like when you call me "Deputy". We can leave all that aside as it is superfluous. The reality is that Mr. Tubridy will have seen Adrian Lynch, the interim director general, say it was possible that Mr. Tubridy did know about this prior to his announcement.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Yes, that was very unfortunate.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Is it Mr. Tubridy's view that Mr. Lynch threw him under the bus with that connotation?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Mr. Lynch is entitled to his conjecture, but in this case it is incorrect.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Okay. I will move to Mr. Tubridy's statement. He has outlined seven untruths. To be fair, he has come here to give his side of the story. As Deputies, we need to hear both sides and find the truth in between. Mr. Tubridy has outlined seven untruths in his statement. My question is perhaps for Mr. Kelly too. Is it the view of the two gentlemen that those untruths were intended to deceive not just the public, but also the Committee of Public Accounts, into thinking they were responsible for everything that has happened here?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

To be frank with the Deputy, we watched some of the proceedings quite aghast and-----

Deputy Verona Murphy

But is it Mr. Tubridy's view that those untruths were intended to deceive?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I would hope - in a more positive moment - that that was not the case and that this is a misunderstanding rather than an attempt to deceive. That is I would hope, but maybe Mr. Kelly has something better to say about that.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I may not be as kind as Mr. Tubridy. There were a lot of misunderstandings. As Mr. Tubridy said at the outset, if, at the start, when we had to ask if we could get the statement, everybody had just sat down and said "What is all this?", it would have been explained. A figure of €120,000 was mentioned, but there was no €120,000. It went on and on.

Deputy Verona Murphy

In Mr. Kelly's case, at some point Mr. Collins was asked why he did not ask questions about the invoices being raised with "consultancy fees" as the description. I do not want to misquote, but the intimation was that he was aware that Mr. Kelly and Dee Forbes had a particularly close relationship-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Verona Murphy

-----but that is not what Mr. Kelly said earlier.

Mr. Noel Kelly

No. As I said, I have never even had a cup of tea with her. I have only ever met her with her lawyers and her accountants. You only ever meet the director general - it was the same with the previous one - when there is something that-----

Deputy Verona Murphy

In Mr. Kelly's view, why would Mr. Collins be of that opinion-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

I do not know that.

Deputy Verona Murphy

-----or why would he express it in that way?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I have no idea whatsoever.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Is it Mr. Kelly's view that Mr. Collins intended to deceive this committee?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I honestly cannot say. I do not know. To be honest, there were so many untruths that I had to stop looking and listening. We were under siege. It was unreal. Unreal.

Deputy Verona Murphy

The notes we received, which we received late this morning, are quite comprehensive in discarding what Mr. Tubridy and Mr. Kelly believe to be untruths. My definition of an "untruth" is a lie. If it is not true, it is a lie.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Sure.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Are the witnesses able to say, in their view, that RTÉ and those representing it lied to this committee?

Mr. Noel Kelly

As the Deputy just said, there were untruths-----

An Cathaoirleach

The Deputy should be careful with her language.

Deputy Verona Murphy

I do not need to be careful because the definition of an "untruth" is-----

An Cathaoirleach

Do Mr. Kelly or Mr. Tubridy wish to answer that?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I think there have been a lot of lies; intentional or not, I do not know.

An Cathaoirleach

Could Mr. Kelly please repeat that?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I think there have been a lot of lies and that is why we are here - intentional or not, I do not know. Again, I do not know half of these people. I have barely met them.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Given that we have outlined our side of the story today, I would love the people to decide what the definition of a truth or mistruth or a lie is, in the sense that I would hope they get some clarity today.

Deputy Verona Murphy

On that, have pre-litigation letters been issued on behalf of both Mr. Tubridy and Mr. Kelly at this point?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Not that I am aware of.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Not at this point. That is just for clarity.

Mr. Noel Kelly

"No" is the answer.

Deputy Verona Murphy

I just want to clarify a number of issues. Mr. Kelly named Trish Whelan. Did Trish Whelan work for his office?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No. Trish Whelan is in RTÉ legal.

Deputy Verona Murphy

And Katrina Faughnan?

Mr. Noel Kelly

She is in the legal department in RTÉ as well.

Deputy Verona Murphy

They are both in RTÉ legal. I want to go back because I have been trying to put myself in Dee Forbes's shoes for the past couple of weeks. I want the witnesses to give me an outline of the situation pre-19 December. Is there any contemporaneous note on what gave rise to that email or the meeting that took place beforehand? We start, if I am not mistaken, on 19 December, with Mr. Kelly's document on the proposed terms for a new contract. From that perspective, where was the starting point that gave rise to the €75,000 commercial relationship?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I am sorry; I was just looking for the document. What is the exact question?

Deputy Verona Murphy

I am trying in my head to figure out what it was that Mr. Kelly put to Dee Forbes that led to RTÉ, as he says, coming up with the plan or scheme to give €75,000. What gave rise to it?

Mr. Noel Kelly

The sponsor, which was probably RTÉ's biggest sponsor, and RTÉ wanted these events. They came with the idea of the events, where and when they would happen, the mini-Late Late roadshow and the Ryan Tubridy and Renault associations. That was completely separate to Mr. Tubridy's radio and TV contract. The first three were done in year three because of Covid and contractually there are still another six owed.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Was it the position that had that €75,000 not been on the table, Mr. Tubridy would have walked from his contract?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Not at all. Mr. Tubridy has other contracts, as I said, for covering for different people on the BBC and he would have his book contracts and so on.

Deputy Verona Murphy

There was no pressure put on Ms Forbes in which there was-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

Not at all.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Mr. Kelly did not say, "Mr. Tubridy has been offered a job at the BBC and if you do not do A, B or C-----"

Mr. Noel Kelly

No. Actually, it was quite the opposite. It was at those meetings that Mr. Tubridy took a €105,000 pay cut per annum. That was the €525,000. If that was the pressure point, he would not have reduced it.

Deputy Verona Murphy

We have heard that. I am just trying to ascertain why Ms Forbes would effectively give away €75,000, which was really RTÉ's public revenue-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

If I could just explain, while the invoices were made out to Astus, they were directly emailed to RTÉ. That is what was necessary to process them with Astus.

Deputy Verona Murphy

Those are much further on. I am trying to ascertain why she would have entered the agreement.

Mr. Noel Kelly

The first invoice was to Renault. As to why she would enter into an agreement-----

Deputy Verona Murphy

Why, first of all, did she give a guarantee and what was at the back of it?

An Cathaoirleach

I ask Mr. Kelly to be brief because we are going over time.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Essentially, that was in case of the sponsor changing. Again, the sponsor relationship is with RTÉ, not with us. For me, what that was about was if there was a new sponsor in during the duration of the contract, we would be able to work with the next sponsor.

It was never an RTÉ payment. It was Renault, and Renault was always paying the invoice. It was never meant to be RTÉ paying this, ever.

An Cathaoirleach

Yes, but it received the benefit of that €75,000 back in terms of the way the deal was constructed.

Mr. Noel Kelly

However-----

An Cathaoirleach

By the way, Mr. Kelly contradicted what Ms Dee Forbes told us at the Committee of Public Accounts previously over the last few years that the reason RTÉ had to pay these fees is because the talent or stars would walk. I do not want to divert to that, however. Deputy Dillon has ten minutes.

Deputy Alan Dillon

I welcome our witnesses and thank them for being here.

Mr. Kelly said today that Mr. Tubridy is being made the "poster boy" for this payment scandal. Why is that the case?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Intentionally or unintentionally, as I said, the board and RTÉ released the statement without consulting us - we just happened to ask for it - and then did not acknowledge there was no wrongdoing and took him off the air. He was the face of it.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Does Mr. Kelly-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

That is where it started and it has been working in its own vacuum over the last two and a half weeks. That is why we wanted to come in. We want to talk to members and tell them everything we know. It has been very hard to hear so many untruths being told.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Does Mr. Kelly accept responsibility that his actions have been reckless in nature when dealing with RTÉ in this matter?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, I do not. We have always followed process every single time. RTÉ is a €350 million organisation. In 2021, €190 million was licence fee-----

Deputy Alan Dillon

Mr. Kelly-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

-----and €148 million was commercial, so-----

Deputy Alan Dillon

I am sorry; Mr. Kelly might let me ask the next question. Mr. Kelly is trying to put the sole blame on RTÉ here. Is that correct?

Mr. Noel Kelly

With regard to?

Deputy Alan Dillon

With regard to this payment scandal.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes, completely.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Does it not take two to tango?

Mr. Noel Kelly

We were just following process. We were just working under instructions from RTÉ.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Okay. Does it suit Mr. Kelly and his client to keep things ambiguous? We have heard many statements already muddying the water per se. When things become difficult, Mr. Kelly can place the blame back on RTÉ management. That is what is happening. That is what has happened in this area of the discussion.

Mr. Noel Kelly

As the Deputy knows, we came ourselves today. This is the first time we have had a chance to talk. If there is any ambiguity, it is on RTÉ's side. What we have set out are answers to-----

Deputy Alan Dillon

Mr. Kelly has been engaging with RTÉ for the last 23 years, is that correct? How many people does he represent?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Three of the top ten, that is all. There is another agent who represents the other seven.

Deputy Alan Dillon

I want to clear up this matter of the raising of the invoices described as being for consultancy fees. Mr. Kelly stated previously that Ms Geraldine O'Leary and RTÉ were responsible.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Alan Dillon

How is that?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Because it was under instruction from them.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Okay.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Again, the relationship with RTÉ is with Renault. We have nothing to do with Renault.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Okay. Mr. Kelly was following instruction.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Therefore, did he collude with RTÉ in a falsehood of concealment of those invoices by labelling them as consultancy fees? That is a straightforward question.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I am sorry; could the Deputy repeat that?

Deputy Alan Dillon

Mr. Kelly said he was following instruction.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Did he, therefore, collude with RTÉ in a falsehood of concealment by describing those invoices as consultancy fees?

Mr. Noel Kelly

As I said, we had no benefit in seeking to suppress knowledge of any payments.

Deputy Alan Dillon

These were fraudulent accounting practices.

Mr. Noel Kelly

We certainly did not do any fraudulent accountancy.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Mr. Kelly followed instruction, however. Alarm bells were never raised with him when representing his client with regard to these invoices?

Mr. Noel Kelly

As I said, we are a small company of eight people. RTÉ is massive. It has accountants, auditors and lawyers.

Deputy Alan Dillon

With regard to the invoices-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

It is huge. We were just following instruction and I had no reason not to believe it.

Deputy Alan Dillon

The former chief financial officer, CFO, described these as defrauding the taxpayer in his opinion. Does Mr. Kelly agree with that assessment?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I did not even hear he had said that. Again-----

Deputy Alan Dillon

Does Mr. Kelly still see these invoices as being related to consultancy fees?

Mr. Noel Kelly

These invoices were as instructed.

Deputy Alan Dillon

They were as instructed. What were they for? What was the nature of them?

Mr. Noel Kelly

They were for a minimum of three "The Late Late Show" style-----

Deputy Alan Dillon

Did they describe what they were intended for?

Mr. Noel Kelly

In the first invoice, as the Deputy can see, we were instructed by RTÉ what to put in it, and in the second and third invoices. We were just following process.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Does Mr. Kelly accept the complete lack of credibility in invoicing a company he had never heard of in a different country for work undertaken in Dublin?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I think the lack of credibility is on RTÉ’s side.

Deputy Alan Dillon

How many other deals were done by RTÉ with Mr. Kelly's business where he was asked to use a company from abroad that he had never heard of before?

Mr. Noel Kelly

The roadshows were unique because it was “The Late Late Show”, Mr. Tubridy, Renault and RTÉ.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Mr. Kelly is not taking any responsibility for the oversight of Mr. Tubridy's earnings with regard to what we have been told in this committee room.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I do not understand what the Deputy means by "oversight of Mr. Tubridy's earnings".

Deputy Alan Dillon

Is Mr. Kelly taking any responsibility in respect of the oversight of the dealings with Mr. Tubridy in relation to these invoices? He said he followed instructions from RTÉ.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Alan Dillon

His responsibility is on behalf of his client. Did he not proof-test each of the steps that were required?

Mr. Noel Kelly

My responsibility is absolutely on my client's behalf and that is what we do.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Mr. Tubridy in his statement emphasised the importance of the full truth and stated that the full truth was concealed. In his opinion, and after what we have heard from Mr. Kelly, who does he believe was responsible for concealing the truth?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I believe the person sitting to my left. What he tells me, I believe, and what he has told you, I believe.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Does Mr. Tubridy think his agent colluded with RTÉ to conceal these payments?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

No. I think my agent did what he was instructed to do by RTÉ.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Mr. Tubridy's earnings went up by €75,000 in 2020, credited from Renault on a side deal, and he then received another €150,000 in 2022 underwritten at the request of RTÉ.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Yes.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Am I missing something here? Between April 2020 and July 2020, when we were in the middle of a pandemic, Mr. Tubridy took a 20% pay cut on his contract, which was signed on 1 April. These side deals were undertaken at a time when the country was going through huge difficulty and Mr. Tubridy feels these payments should not have been put into the public domain.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I was under the understanding that the payments had come from Renault, a very successful commercial company, so I did not feel that it was an RTÉ situation.

Mr. Noel Kelly

It was a separate contract.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Separate to-----

Deputy Alan Dillon

Even though RTÉ, as we have heard from Mr. Tubridy's agent, was responsible for the payment of these invoices.

Mr. Noel Kelly

We were not paid by RTÉ. We were paid by Astus and we assumed that it was from Renault.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Yes. That is the misunderstanding.

Mr. Noel Kelly

That is the misunderstanding. Renault paid the first one. Under instruction, RTÉ asked us to send in the other ones and we were paid by Astus.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Again, who suggested the side deal of any description?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I do not know what the Deputy means by a "side deal".

Deputy Alan Dillon

The tripartite agreement.

Mr. Noel Kelly

That was RTÉ.

Deputy Alan Dillon

Who wanted the underwriting in the first instance?

Mr. Noel Kelly

The underwriting, as I said, was simply about if the sponsor changed. That is all. We never assumed RTÉ would be paying for anything. If the sponsor changed, we would be able to re-engage with the sponsor but the relationship with the sponsor is with RTÉ. We were not allowed near it. We had never worked with Renault before; we only worked with it on this.

Deputy Alan Dillon

At the time, Mr. Tubridy looked for written assurances in respect of any further pay cuts in his 2020 contract. Did he seek a written letter regarding that?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

My-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, he did not; I did. Having taken a €105,000 cut per year for five years, totalling €525,000, and having not accepted the €120,000 that he was due in contract, I just said "Look, you can't." When is a contract a contract? A contract is only a contract when it is agreed and honoured on both sides.

Deputy Alan Dillon

RTÉ claimed that it completely rejected the claim of underwriting the Renault tripartite agreement. Does Mr. Kelly accept what RTÉ said about that?

Mr. Noel Kelly

The most important email here today is on page 10 of our book.

This is from the previous CFO. It states:

We made good progress on what the commercial agreement would be and we agree to one in Dublin and two outside Dublin [again, all from RTÉ] which are RTÉ-led LLS [The Late Late Show] events and we can provide you with a side letter to underwrite this fee for the duration of the contract.

Deputy Alan Dillon

What date is on that?

Mr. Noel Kelly

That was 20 February 2020. How did we know RTÉ was going to be paying for it? What the letter was about was that if the sponsor changed, we would be able to work with the other sponsor.

An Cathaoirleach

I call Deputy McAuliffe.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

I thank the Chair and the witnesses. I should start by saying that the Committee of Public Accounts has a very clear remit to get to the bottom of what is happening, and certainly the witnesses' presence here today is very welcome. They have provided additional information, and I thank them for that. I also want to note that in Mr. Tubridy's opening statement, he says he has great respect for the institutions of this House. I think that statement has great credibility. I have listened to him for a long time, and I appreciate those comments.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

It is important.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

The difficulty we have is that for whatever reason, something happened here and, essentially, RTÉ reduced its income by €75,000. In turn, €75,000 was paid to Tuttle Productions, albeit for additional duties on Mr. Tubridy's behalf. Who knew what and when is really important, because that is essentially what happened. Some €75,000 of a credit note was given to Renault. In return, €75,000 was given to Mr. Tubridy's production company, and he did additional duties. It is really important that we know who and what, and that is why some of the information he has given us is really crucial.

Mr. Tubridy said very clearly that one of the truths he wishes to list is that he is an independent contractor, and I accept that. Would Mr. Tubridy accept that this arrangement with RTÉ is not like work he has gathered from other companies, like the BBC and so on? In essence, RTÉ facilitated it. It introduced it to its clients. It was party to the agreement. The events followed the "The Late Late Show" format, which is mentioned in the agreement. RTÉ paid for the staging, the catering and so on, so it is not fair to compare this contract with other contracts that Mr. Tubridy gained entirely separately. Would he accept that?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Yes, that is a fair observation.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

Okay. The suggestion is that RTÉ created this arrangement in order to bolster Mr. Tubridy's income. Does he accept that?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I understand why the Deputy would say that, but I cannot accept it as a matter of fact. It is fair to say that as an independent contractor, one does different jobs for different companies. For example, I have written a couple of books, albeit a couple of kids' books. As Mr. Kelly has said, I would have done work with the BBC before. They are independent contracts. They are completely separate.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

RTÉ would not have paid for the catering at the launch of those events, provided staff or had any involvement.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

That is fair enough, yes. I understand entirely the nuance of the Deputy's point.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

It is a fair point that Mr. Tubridy has made about being an independent contractor, but it is not necessarily a relevant point to this, because this was an arrangement created by RTÉ, at its behest, according to his evidence. It was created by RTÉ, and the net effect was that the taxpayer lost €75,000, and Mr. Tubridy gained it. Whether he knew that was happening is a different question, but that is what happened.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I want to address the first question. As a sponsor of "The Late Late Show", Renault was perhaps the most important sponsor, of all sponsors. The fee paid by the sponsor of "The Late Late Show" would dwarf any other sponsorship that it had. RTÉ was focused on keeping Renault happy by maximising the potential of its investment in "The Late Late Show". Ms Geraldine O'Leary said when she was here the other week that, certainly during the Covid-19 pandemic, they had tickets for the audience. They had no tickets for the audience. It was said that there was a green room; there was no green room. They were trying to-----

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

Mr. Kelly is way off point.

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, I am saying that it was trying to keep them happy.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

I put the point to Mr. Tubridy and I will put it to Mr. Kelly. Does he appreciate that RTÉ lost €75,000 in income, as a fact, and that Mr. Tubridy's production company gained €75,000 as a result of this tripartite agreement?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, I completely disagree with that.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

Mr. Kelly cannot disagree with that, because that is what actually happened.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I know, but I want to explain from our side. The first €75,000 that was paid by Renault - not RTÉ - for the delivery of three Renault roadshows had nothing to do with Mr. Tubridy's broadcasting contract.

The amount claimed was their payment because they had issued a credit note. We had no idea about the issue of credit notes.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

I am not asking Mr. Kelly how it arose. I appreciate he is referring to his notes. I am not asking how it arose. Does he accept that RTÉ reduced its income from Renault by €75,000 and that Mr. Tubridy gained an additional €75,000 for additional work?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Sure. That is completely between RTÉ and Renault.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

Of course, but does Mr. Kelly accept that is what happened?

Mr. Noel Kelly

We have no knowledge or understanding of what they do. As the Deputy can see, we have no idea.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

I am taking it that Mr. Kelly accepts those are the facts in this situation.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Sure. We have no idea what Renault does. Regarding Mr. Tubridy's contract, it was a completely set contract.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

The crux of the problem is that this is what actually happened and we need to find out who knew that because it looks like there is an attempt to deceive.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Okay. If that is the question, we were deceived as well. We had no idea.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

It is entirely likely that they do not know, but are Mr. Kelly and Mr. Tubridy both saying they were not aware that the title sponsor of "The Late Late Show" was reducing its sponsorship by €75,000?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

So that never came up. That is not part of it.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Absolutely not.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

The cost-neutral nature of the agreement is really important because that is what really brings it down to the core, which is that money was taken off the books. Ms O'Leary stated in her evidence that she raised the credit note of €75,000 on the instruction of Ms Forbes, and Mr. Kelly and Mr. Tubridy are saying they had no idea of this arrangement.

Mr. Noel Kelly

No idea of that.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

It never former part of any of the contract negotiations and so on.

Mr. Noel Kelly

No.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

That is great. That is important to get on the table.

The difficult with that is that many of Mr. Tubridy's colleagues would have taken reductions and they would perceive this additional arrangement facilitated or arranged by RTÉ to be not in the spirit of what was happening at the time. I suppose Mr. Tubridy wanted at some point to go back into RTÉ, go into the canteen and be able to look the person serving him a cup of coffee in the eye, to talk down the microphone with a sound engineer at the other end of it and to look through the lens of a camera. He has to be able to look those people in the eye.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

The Deputy is describing my friends.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

Yes. However, the facts of the situation were that Mr. Tubridy received additional money and they did not.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Yes, and back to my opening statement, cuts were made down through the years.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

Other reductions.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Some 40% since 2012.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Since when?

Mr. Noel Kelly

40%, which excludes the €120,000.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

The final figure is a 40% pay cut. I tried not to shirk my responsibilities in that regard.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

I fully accept that but the facts are before us and that is Mr. Tubridy's difficulty. It is everyone's difficulty.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

This is why we are here today; I appreciate that.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

I want to turn to the invoice that was raised. There is an email in Mr. Kelly's pack on page 25 which appears to be from somebody in RTÉ which reads "Do not put any person's name on the Invoice. If he sends It back to me I will then sort everything else out". Who was that email from?

Mr. Noel Kelly

It was from somebody who worked for Geraldine O'Leary.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

So it is from an RTÉ staff member.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

Can Mr. Kelly provide the committee with the name of that person? I am happy if he wants to reflect on it.

Mr. Noel Kelly

We were instructed to exercise care with general data protection regulation, GDPR.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

It is a GDPR issue.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

It looks very clear to me, as somebody responsible for public money, that when somebody says in an email not to put any person's name on the invoice, it is important for me to know who that was. I ask the witnesses to reflect on that and whether they can provide us with the name. I will ask RTÉ the same question.

The second question is that on 7 May, a Microsoft Teams meeting was held and there were four people at that meeting. Who were the four people at that meeting?

Mr. Noel Kelly

That would have been Trish Whelan, one of the RTÉ solicitors, Dee Forbes, myself and a colleague of mine, Niamh.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

A colleague of Mr. Kelly's. The fourth person who we have not been able to identify so far was a colleague of Mr. Kelly's. Again, this is useful information.

I then turn to the issue of the invoices. I have to question Mr. Kelly on this point because I have the invoice for the first €75,000 here and also the invoices from the other two €75,000 payments. One is raised by Mr. Kelly and the other two are by CMS Marketing.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

One contains the full description and the other two are without the full description, all relating to the same €75,000 and the arrangement with Renault. Mr. Kelly is the only one who raised these two invoices. It really strikes at the credibility of what he is saying that he treated one separately from the other. Even at RTÉ's instruction, Mr. Kelly treated these invoices separately. Would that be fair to say?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Again, we were under instruction. As can be seen, the description from RTÉ-----

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

However, the invoices were raised with Mr. Kelly.

Mr. Kelly has a fiduciary responsibility as director of his company. He raised two invoices for the same three payments. He raised them under different companies, for different reasons, and invoiced them to different people.

Mr. Noel Kelly

They were sent, under instruction, to RTÉ. We presumed Renault was going to be paying this.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

This is my final point. Mr. Kelly is very clear when he says that, "I should stress that at this time we in NK Management had no idea who Astus was. We had no reason to think Astus was linked to RTE or that it was acting on behalf of RTE." Would he be surprised that his name is also mentioned elsewhere in the Astus account?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Was this the-----

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

It was the barter account. On 30 November 2018, there is a reference to €2,394 raised from a charity lunch, held by Noel Kelly in aid of Chernobyl.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Right. That is an RTÉ issue.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

My understanding is this was obviously a fundraising lunch and I am not reflecting on the charity in any way

Mr. Noel Kelly

Sure.

Mr. Noel Kelly

However, it strikes to the heart of Mr. Kelly's suggestion that he did not know what Astus was, when there was a previous arrangement involving albeit a charity lunch, where the Astus account was invoiced.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Again-----

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

Perhaps he might help us. If Mr. Kelly will tell us how that was invoiced in the past and had no connection with Astus, his story stacks up. If there is a previous invoice, and Mr. Kelly told somebody to invoice Astus for the charity lunch held, then the story does not. I do not have the facts before me; I am just asking the question.

An Cathaoirleach

We are over time. Will Mr. Kelly briefly clarify that point for the Deputy please?

Mr. Noel Kelly

RTÉ wanted to take a table at the lunch in question. It asked the people organising it to invoice that. I do not know-----

An Cathaoirleach

Thank you.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

RTÉ told the charity to invoice Astus. Mr. Kelly did not know Astus was invoiced.

Mr. Noel Kelly

No.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I will stay where we are at the moment. I read the documents but they were too late. It was insulting to the committee and to the staff. It did not go down well. However, I found the documents quite compelling and a very strong rebuttal. Those were some of my initial thoughts. It is beginning to fall apart a bit. RTÉ and the DG are obviously watching this. The statement issued by RTÉ this morning is astonishing. If the DG is not watching this, somebody should tell him to look at whoever issued this and how it was issued. The witnesses have provided documentation, in fairness to them, relating to the side payment or side deal. The email from Breda O'Keefe in RTÉ states that "we can provide you with a side letter to underwrite this fee for the duration of the contract." That evidence is compelling to our committee. It quite obviously completely contradicts the evidence given previously by RTÉ. They are totally opposite. That is a big tick mark on the side of Mr. Tubridy and Mr. Kelly.

However, on the other side there was no 20% drop in salary, in real terms. To say so has no credibility whatsoever. It has zero credibility, given the €75,000 and the different payments. It is quite obvious it was absorbed in a different way. The second issue, which involves a huge amount of credibility, is that Mr. Kelly must have said about 15 times that he was acting under instructions from RTÉ relating to the payment processes. The first payment goes through Noel Kelly, one of his companies. That is to Renault for the first year. The second ones are to Astus through CMS. Why the switch over?

Here is the real issue. I have emails coming in to me from all of these Nigerian cousins saying I have won they lotto. They instruct me to do x,y and z. I do not do it. I think Mr. Kelly has serious accountancy issues here. I think his companies have serious accountancy issues here based on the evidence being given. This is not how companies behave. They get instructions to pay an anonymised unknown company for something that is then referred to as consultancy fees, under a contract that has been negotiated with RTÉ for private work outside, and then switches from Noel Kelly to CMS for the second and third years.

None of this is credible. It does not stand up so that is where Mr. Kelly's arguments fall down.

I want to pose some questions. Mr. Kelly mentioned Mr. Tubridy took a 20% drop in salary. I am looking for short, sharp answers purely because of time; I am not trying to be rude or anything. I think all of us here know that this is this is not accurate. Was Mr. Tubridy doing the same number of hours on all the shows? Are we comparing apples with apples and oranges with oranges? Was there a change between 2015 to 2019 and 2019 to 2023 regarding Mr. Tubridy's hours of work? We can then correlate how much of a drop in pay there really was based on hours worked.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

The Deputy is trying to establish the percentage of the pay cut I took in the years from-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

No, I am asking Mr. Tubridy a very simple question.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I am sorry. This is not my strength.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I know; it is tiresome.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

No, it is not tiresome. It is just that it is not my ball park.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Did Mr. Tubridy work the same number of hours on his radio show and TV show from 2019 to 2023 as he did per year from 2015 to 2019?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I would imagine so.

Deputy Alan Kelly

So it the exact same.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes, 205 one-hour radio shows that can go up to two hours and 38 TV shows involving a minimum of two hours but as the show could go on until 12.00 a.m., it could be two and a half hours. It depends.

Deputy Alan Kelly

So Mr. Kelly did not look for any changes in the contract to reduce the number of hours or the end time

Mr. Noel Kelly

There were conversations. The big issue is that-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I can answer that.

Mr. Noel Kelly

-----the longer the duration of "The Late Late Show", the more sponsors and advertising go in so there was a push back when we asked if we could finish "The Late Late Show" at a hard 11.30 p.m.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I understand that.

Mr. Noel Kelly

That would have been two hours and two hours are what is in the contract but sometimes it went on until 12 a.m. or 12.15 a.m. so-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

I know. I was on it.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

The Deputy knows the score. It can go late.

Deputy Alan Kelly

My point was whether there were any changes to Mr. Tubridy's hours in actual real terms contractually and Mr. Tubridy is saying "No".

Mr. Noel Kelly

No.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I will return to the CMS versus NK Management issue because I was very interested in Paula Mullooly's overlap of various different emails regarding the audit that came through. She asked about the invoices on 3 May regarding the two payments of €75,000. The emails go to NK Management but the response is from CMS. The response is information from CMS. Has CMS done a large quantity of work with RTÉ separately?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Why would NK Management be swapped out and CMS put in for payment purposes and communication purposes from a corporate management point of view?

Mr. Noel Kelly

As I say, I own the two companies and sometimes we would invoice out of one and sometimes out of another and then cross invoice so there is no-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

Throwing his eyes up to heaven and saying they cross over-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

No-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

From a corporate governance and an accountancy point of view-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

Again, we were asked to invoice. We were asked how to invoice, when to invoice-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

I am going to be straight. I do not buy any of that. I do not think anybody listening or watching or anybody in this room buys that. Deputies Dillon and Ó Cathasaigh went through this. This is not appropriate regarding how things should be done.

A third company called Noel Kelly Management Nominees Limited was set up and registered on 16 March 2023.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes

Deputy Alan Kelly

What is the purpose of that?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I am not here to discuss that. I am here to discuss-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

Fine. It has nothing to do with anything here.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy Alan Kelly

That is fine. From his perspective, Mr. Kelly gets advertising clients for RTÉ on the one hand while, on the other, he represents various clients as an agent to the stars or talent or whatever phrase people are using these days.

Mr. Kelly must have been doing a significant amount of business for RTÉ as regards generating advertising revenue on the one hand and negotiating fairly significant contracts for his clients who work in RTÉ on the other hand. Is that a fair statement?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No

Deputy Alan Kelly

No.

Mr. Noel Kelly

For instance, we have a young chef on our books. We got the chef a book deal so he became an author. Then we got the chef a TV show. The issue is that there is a huge lack of funding for programme making so we try to get sponsors to help to make the shows.

Deputy Alan Kelly

NK Management gets sponsors for RTÉ for advertising purposes for shows.

Mr. Noel Kelly

No. It is for completely independent shows that RTÉ might buy, but I am just saying that-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

If Mr. Kelly will not give me this information, I will ask RTÉ for information about advertising and clients for the past ten years so we will get it all.

My last three questions are for Mr. Tubridy. Earlier his representative, Mr. Kelly, stated that a contract is not a contract unless it is agreed by both parties. Where does Mr. Tubridy stand currently as regards his relationship with RTÉ? Is he employed or not? How does he perceive that?

My second question relates to one of the gigs with Renault. There was an invoice for €847 for someone to assist Mr. Tubridy. Will Mr. Tubridy throw some light on that?

This is a genuine, honest question. Toy Show, The Musical has been an unmitigated disaster conceptually and in every way. In fairness to Mr. Tubridy, he had zero involvement, nothing to do with it. He did not promote it and was not involved in it in any way. Did he think it was a bad idea from the outset and not want anything to do with it?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

My understanding is that I am still in contract with RTÉ and my aim and hope is to go back to work.

The bill the Deputy referred to was for a car service from Dublin to Drogheda and back in one night. I can go into further detail if the Deputy wishes but that is what it was for.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Was it for Mr. Tubridy or someone else?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

It was for me.

Finally, on Toy Show, The Musical, the people in RTÉ were trying to dream big. I will always wish them well with that but it was not for me.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

The witnesses are welcome.

I will go back to the invoices. The invoices are not a creative document Mr. Kelly. They are intended to be a true record of what services were provided or what work was done. Essentially, both sides were complicit in what the chair of the board said was "an act designed to deceive". Did Mr. Kelly challenge it?

Mr. Noel Kelly

We were deceived. We had no knowledge whatsoever of the arrangement on the part-----

Deputy Catherine Murphy

NK Management issued the invoices.

Mr. Noel Kelly

May I explain? We were not consulted about it, nor were we told about the nature of it at any stage. We were instructed by RTÉ to make out the second and third invoices for the Renault Road Show to Artus for consultancy services. We sent them to RTÉ to look after them.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Mr. Kelly has a few companies. He knows what it is to raise an invoice. He took instructions from RTÉ without challenging them and essentially there is a moral and legal imperative around that. I would like to ask Mr. Tubridy-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

Sure. Can I finish that point? At the time we did not know who Astus was-----

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Mr. Kelly has said all of this before.

Mr. Noel Kelly

-----and we presumed it had a relationship with Renault.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

I am moving on.

Mr. Noel Kelly

We were following instructions. We were paid by Astus, not by RTÉ.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

"Following instructions" is known as the Nuremburg defence.

Is Mr. Tubridy happy about that kind of operation not being challenged? It was being done in his name.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I have not sat down in front of an RTÉ management person in 20 years to talk about money, contracts or anything like that. That is why I have Mr. Kelly.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Is Mr. Tubridy happy with people just following instructions?

Mr. Tubridy knows what an invoice is.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Honest to goodness, I do not get into invoices and that kind of thing. My job is to sit in front of a microphone and present a radio or TV show.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

That is not the question.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I trust Mr. Kelly and he trusts the process. We all hope to get the best deal in life.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

That is not the question I am asking. I want to go back to Grant Thornton's second review into the €120,000. We know there was €225,000 and that leaves €75,000. Grant Thornton is conducting another review into the €120,000 from 2017 to 2019. The witnesses are categorically saying that was simply waived. They are saying it was not paid and that RTÉ knew that. Do the witnesses have any explanation for why RTÉ would be conducting an expensive review into that?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I have no idea. We have a further meeting with Grant Thornton on that. We asked RTÉ-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

In discussions with RTÉ in March 2020, it spoke about how it would treat this in its accounts. RTÉ said that for accountancy reasons, it was going to take the €120,000 off the previous three years' contracts. That is €50,000 in year five, €50,000 in year four and €20,000 in year three. Those are extraordinary figures and we said that this did not make any sense as we had not invoiced, received or refunded the €120,000. We asked how it could be deducted and we thought it seemed mad. We thought that RTÉ's proposed treatment of this would give the impression that I was being paid €120,000 less than I was being paid. We made it clear that the €120,000 should not be taken off or deducted for prior year actual earnings, as can be seen in the booklet on pages 14 and 15. RTÉ appeared to agree with our point and it accepted our amendments in the final letter of agreement on this issue, as detailed on page 16 of the documents provided. However, on 21 and 23 January, when the salaries of the top ten earners were published, RTÉ appears to have reverted, oddly, to its original stance and deducted the €120,000 as it originally said it would. We were surprised to see that.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Mr. Tubridy opened by saying he is a contractor and we all understand-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

An independent contractor.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

But RTÉ would not normally find Mr. Tubridy work as an independent contractor, and that is why this-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Is not ordinary.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

This is not ordinary and that is why it is impossible for us to separate out-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I understand.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

-----the difference between the Renault contract and Mr. Tubridy's salary.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

It would effectively be a case of RTÉ finding work for Mr. Tubridy, where Mr. Tubridy would normally find that work himself.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Again I would hand this to Mr. Kelly because he is the one who finds the work and who negotiates the contract side of things.

Mr. Noel Kelly

The value of this for RTÉ was keeping Renault happy as a sponsor, keeping it on board and making sure it would come back season after season. That is why RTÉ wanted to do this. Renault is the biggest sponsor that RTÉ has.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Did Mr. Kelly know that Renault had insisted that the commercial agreement was done on a cost neutral basis?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No. I had no idea. We invoiced Renault. We had no idea.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Who would Mr. Kelly normally deal with when he is dealing with the contractual arrangements for his clients in RTÉ?

Mr. Noel Kelly

It depends. Some of our contractors might do eight one-and-a-half-hour shows in a year and that would be it.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Mr. Kelly would not normally deal with the director general.

Mr. Noel Kelly

No. That would only be on bigger contracts. It would generally be the head of radio. Some contracts are radio-only where my clients would do a one-hour radio show once per week or they might do-----

Deputy Catherine Murphy

So Dee Forbes was not the only one who would have been aware of all of this?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No. Absolutely not.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

We have been told that only one person had an overview of all of this.

Mr. Noel Kelly

She could not have been. That is why I find this whole thing so bizarre. Some of our clients might just have a one-hour radio contract, some would have a TV contract and some might have a bit of radio and a bit of TV in their contracts.

It would depend: head of TV; under-head of TV; executive; managing director, MD, of TV; MD of radio. It would just depend where it would sit, and then you would have an overall, like Alan Tyler, who, as Deputy Brady was saying, is head of entertainment.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Sorry, I have very little time.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Sorry, I am just saying there are so many people. There is 1,800 people in the organisation and so many people to deal with.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Mr. Kelly does not operate for 1,800 people.

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, no.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Mr. Kelly is an agent for a small number of people.

I refer to the Breda O'Keeffe statement last week. Ms O'Keeffe stated, "When I left in March 2020, an RTÉ guarantee on the proposed Renault agreement was not on offer, as far as I was aware." Ms O'Keeffe was linking in the Renault agreement with the salary. One can see why this keeps on coming back to the same thing. Mr. Kelly has, in his booklet on page 7, the email from Ms O'Keeffe. Was there other correspondence because this was not finalised until May? The RTÉ statement this morning is telling us that the 20 February agreement is being characterised as a contractual commitment.

Mr. Noel Kelly

If I can explain, the whole purpose of this - it was not about contract, not a contract - was other people knew bar Dee Forbes. That is the whole point. All along, it was said to the committee the week before last - central to this - nobody else knew. There was no secret. This is the secret piece. There was no secret whatsoever. There was no secret.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Given all Mr. Tubridy has listened to over the past few weeks, he says he wants to go back and work on the radio. Looking at it from his perspective, that appears to come across as strange given all the issues that he has documented in his booklet and the opening statement.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

What is strange?

Deputy Catherine Murphy

Wanting to go back to an organisation that Mr. Tubridy obviously feels has badly damaged him.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I have been badly damaged by the last three weeks, but not necessarily by RTÉ as an institution. There are people that I am dying to get back to work with. Like most decent Irish people, they are in there making an honest living and they are working hard to pull together the shows, and I want to be back with them. I had my beef with some people there, as is obvious in the documents, but I still see my future there.

Deputy James O'Connor

I welcome both witnesses. It is important to reference that they were not compelled to be here which is obviously welcome.

The first question I have for Mr. Tubridy is: when he has a major guest coming on the show, how long does it take him to prepare for that?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Forgive me, that is an odd question. Does the Deputy mean on the night of a show?

Deputy James O'Connor

No, come on. It is a good question. How long does it take Mr. Tubridy to prepare for a major act coming on "The Late Late Show"?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

It takes days and weeks.

Deputy James O'Connor

Okay. This is a 39-page document. For people who are not aware what it looks like, this document was provided to us this morning. This came into our Microsoft Teams accounts this morning at 8.23 a.m., if I am correct. It has 39 pages. The meeting commenced at 10.30 a.m. in private session. That is not much time to go through 39 pages like this.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I understand.

Deputy James O'Connor

Can Mr. Tubridy accept - just one second-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Yes.

Deputy James O'Connor

Can Mr. Tubridy accept how it is not physically possible for anybody here to comprehensively go through that information?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

That was unfortunate and I do apologise to every single member of the committee for that. It has been a torturous three weeks-----

Deputy James O'Connor

I accept that.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

No, no. Please allow me to finish the sentence.

Deputy James O'Connor

Unfortunately-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

No, no. Unfortunately, what has gone missing in the last three weeks-----

An Cathaoirleach

Just briefly.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Cathaoirleach, forgive me.

An Cathaoirleach

Just briefly.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

There has been a humanity bypass a bit here and I ask the Deputy to bear with us. We have worked tirelessly to put this document together and we got it in when we could. I apologise.

Deputy James O'Connor

I appreciate Mr. Tubridy's apology and accept it. Purely from a human perspective, I think all of us here understand this is difficult. We are politicians. We know what it is like to be dragged through the ringer.

Unfortunately, this is the next point of questioning I wanted to come to anyway. Mr. Tubridy has moved on to that properly. The reason this has erupted is the work that was done by the audit report that identified the pay arrangements that we have discussed with the executive board of RTÉ.

I just want to get a clear picture. When did Mr. Tubridy first become aware of the issues that were brought to light through the audit that was carried out? When did he first get knowledge of that audit being carried out?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

What month are we in now, July? I am going to say June, maybe. To be honest, I really became engaged in this story when the statement was issued. I had no idea this thing was going on.

Deputy James O'Connor

To clarify, it is a really important question. I am not trying to trip Mr. Tubridy up.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I appreciate that. I am telling the truth. That is why I am here.

Deputy James O'Connor

When did Mr. Tubridy become aware that that report was being carried out?

Deputy James O'Connor

Pardon me. I am sorry.

Deputy James O'Connor

I am asking about the report that was carried out.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Yes, of course.

Deputy James O'Connor

When did Mr. Tubridy become aware of the Grant Thornton report?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

On 26 June 2023.

Deputy James O'Connor

So 26 June 2023 was the very first time that he had knowledge-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

That I had knowledge, yes.

Deputy James O'Connor

-----that the Grant Thornton report was being done. I ask the same question of Mr. Kelly. Obviously, if Grant Thornton was delving into the pay arrangements, in relation to which it did highlight concerns, was it the same for him?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No. For us, it was in May. We had a meeting with Grant Thornton.

Deputy James O'Connor

That was on 23 May. Is that correct?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes, we had a meeting with Grant Thornton on 23 May.

Deputy James O'Connor

Was that the first time documents were requested from Mr. Kelly's company in relation to Mr. Tubridy's pay?

Mr. Noel Kelly

On 3 May, RTÉ legal emailed us and asked us about invoice queries. On 26 May, RTÉ legal wrote to us and said that Grant Thornton was investigating the process. On 31 May, we met with Grant Thornton and discussed everything with it. On 23 June, RTÉ released its first statement and we only received the report on 26 June. We did not get a copy of the report.

Deputy James O'Connor

When did Mr. Kelly first alert Mr. Tubridy that the report was being carried out and that he may have had concerns?

Mr. Noel Kelly

On 22 June, when the statement came out from RTÉ and the report was released. We did not even have the report. That happened on the Thursday. It was four days later before the correction was put in saying that there was no wrongdoing on behalf of Ryan Tubridy or us. At that stage, Mr. Tubridy was off air. How should I put this? Had they not been so hasty or that there was-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

If they had not rushed everything out, 99% of this whole thing would not have been an issue because we would have given them everything they wanted if they simply asked questions. We were there for them.

Deputy James O'Connor

I am asking the question for Mr. Tubridy's own benefit. I know he may feel that I am being in some way indignant, but I am not.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Not at all. I totally understand what the Deputy is saying.

Deputy James O'Connor

The reason I am asking is that it is crucial to us understanding and verifying that the information is correct-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Please ask; I do not mind at all.

Deputy James O'Connor

-----and it was nothing to do with his decision to step down from "The Late Late Show". That is why I am asking that.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Sorry, is the Deputy trying to clarify-----

Deputy James O'Connor

No, that is clarified. I am content with that.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I am happy to hear that.

Deputy James O'Connor

I want to move on to the deal surrounding Renault. The first year of the deal was 2021. Is that correct?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes. The first year should have been 2020, and then from 2021 to 2024. Obviously, with Covid, there were no events in 2020 and 2021. The first lot of events happened in 2022, when we had the first roadshows in Cork, Dublin and Drogheda.

Deputy James O'Connor

At what stage was Mr. Kelly informed that Renault did not want to continue with its part of the deal following the outbreak of the pandemic, that it was withdrawing and that, subsequently, RTÉ was stepping in and providing the funding to fill the gap?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Renault never stepped back from the arrangement. It is still the sponsor. At no stage was it going to be RTÉ.

Deputy James O'Connor

I mentioned stepping back from the arrangement. As we have discussed already, that €75,000 was paid by RTÉ. Is that correct?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, the money was paid by Renault.

Deputy James O'Connor

In the latter half of the arrangement, where Mr. Tubridy was not participating-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

They were paid by Astus.

Deputy James O'Connor

They were paid by Astus.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes.

Deputy James O'Connor

Effectively, that is what we need to get an understanding of. What work was done in return for that in the later years, during the pandemic and in 2022?

Mr. Noel Kelly

As I said, the first three events, which were supposed to take place in 2020, took place in 2022. There are still six roadshows owed for 2020 and 2021 or, if you like, 2023 and 2024. It is still under contract to do those roadshows.

Deputy James O'Connor

Mr. Kelly is telling me that those roadshows are owed effectively-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes, absolutely.

Deputy James O'Connor

-----and they will have to be done subsequently.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes, 100%.

Deputy James O'Connor

Mr. Tubridy was paid in advance.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Yes, for services outstanding. I am absolutely good for that.

Deputy James O'Connor

I must ask, from the point of view of reputational damage, which I think is key, did Mr. Tubridy not assess this going into the pandemic? We all know how difficult it was, and Mr. Tubridy broadcast throughout it, with great admiration and respect from the population. Did he in any way say to himself that this is a dangerous situation because the published figures pertaining to his salary that had been published in the newspapers - the Irish Independent was publishing those figures - were not reflective of his actual take-home pay? I have heard the evidence that Mr. Tubridy provided and what he has said. At the end of the day, there was a tripartite agreement involving the national broadcaster, RTÉ, with Renault and yourselves. Did Mr. Tubridy not ask himself that maybe it was just not wise for him to be taking this money at that point in time, considering what was going on in the country?

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Yes, it is a fair observation and I probably should have been a bit more inquisitive about these things.

Deputy James O'Connor

Mr. Tubridy never asked any questions in regard to that.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

I say what I say: I should have been more inquisitive. It is a fair point.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Can I answer? This contract was written before Covid and it was just then that Covid happened. This was starting in 2020 and then Covid started at the end of March.

Deputy James O'Connor

Hang on a second. To be fair, my line of questioning is reflecting that. I am just asking, in relation to the outbreak of Covid, was it really necessary that this arrangement, in some shape or form, remained in place. Ultimately, the taxpayers’ money involved in RTÉ as an organisation was being used to supplement Mr. Tubridy's income. That is the perception we need to deal with.

Mr. Noel Kelly

That is the perception but that is not the reality. This was a contract with Renault for services, and RTÉ and Renault, again, are the parties.

Deputy James O'Connor

Those services were not provided but the payment was made.

Mr. Noel Kelly

To be honest, by 2022, they all would have been provided if Covid was not there.

Deputy James O'Connor

We know that.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I am sorry, it was for three years. Now, there are six roadshows owed.

Deputy James O'Connor

On the negotiations around pay, this is important because we discussed it with the RTÉ executive board. They were not very forthcoming with answers and now there is a very wide chasm between the information Mr. Tubridy and Mr. Kelly have provided us with today and what the board have given us previously. Who in the executive board of RTÉ was involved in those pay negotiations?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Who in the executive board?

Deputy James O'Connor

Yes, who was present and involved?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Again, the head of TV and the head of radio would say, “Right, we want these hours, we want those hours” and they would then discuss that with the CFO and the relevant accountants. As I said, there are lots of accountants and lawyers and everything else. They would all have their conversations and then they would come back. My job is to get the best deal for my client.

Deputy James O'Connor

I am sorry, but Mr. Kelly did not answer my question. Who was present from the executive board of RTÉ for these negotiations?

Mr. Noel Kelly

There would have been Breda, Trish, the CFO, legal, and then if there was an impasse-----

Deputy James O'Connor

I see Mr. Kelly has been handed a document. He may take a moment to read it.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I am sorry. You would have had Breda O'Keeffe, Dee Forbes, ourselves, our lawyer and Jim Jennings from the executive.

Deputy James O'Connor

My time is up. I may come back in subsequently.

An Cathaoirleach

We have to finish at 2 p.m. I have some questions. The number of presenters Mr. Kelly represents at RTÉ is three of the top ten. How many people engaged with RTÉ does he represent in total at RTÉ?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Oh, Lord.

An Cathaoirleach

Is it 20?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, not at all.

An Cathaoirleach

Is it ten?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, the ones we really represent-----

An Cathaoirleach

I do not want to delay the meeting. I am asking a straight question.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Full contract would be somebody who had TV and radio - that is three – and then there would be other people who might just do a one-off series or whatever.

An Cathaoirleach

How many roughly? Is it a dozen?

Mr. Noel Kelly

No, it would not be.

An Cathaoirleach

Is it six?

Mr. Noel Kelly

It would be nearer to three full-time and then the rest would just be part-time or-----

An Cathaoirleach

How would you describe your trade?

Mr. Noel Kelly

We are an agency.

An Cathaoirleach

Your own trade, your background. Are you a negotiator? Are you a consultant? What type of work have you done throughout your life?

Mr. Noel Kelly

My background would be marketing and brand.

An Cathaoirleach

Sales.

Mr. Noel Kelly

And sales. I see people as brands. It is how you take a young talent. Talent, to me, is the person behind reception, like today - the people who make us feel welcome when we come in - that is a talent. It is the camera people, the floor people. Talent, to me, is not a rock god. It is not a singer or Tom Cruise, or stuff.

An Cathaoirleach

We will all agree on that one. Mr. Kelly comes from a sales background. Is that correct?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes, a sales and marketing background.

An Cathaoirleach

What kind of goods did he sell? What kind of marketing was he involved in before he got involved with RTÉ, 23 years ago?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I have worked with NK Management and CMS for 26 years and before that, I worked for Cadbury. Before Cadbury-----

An Cathaoirleach

What was Mr. Kelly selling for Cadbury?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Chocolate.

An Cathaoirleach

Thank you. That is fine.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

It was not soap, anyway.

An Cathaoirleach

That is fine.

Mr. Noel Kelly

It was not soap.

An Cathaoirleach

Senior staff at RTÉ have described Mr. Kelly as having a very close relationship with Ms Dee Forbes.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes, I saw that. That might be the case if a close relationship were one in a room with lawyers and accountants and not a cup of tea between us, and never having met for lunch or dinner. I do not know the lady. I have always found her to be terribly professional and hardworking during Covid and everything else. I would only ever meet Dee Forbes if there were an impasse in respect of a contract, regarding where we were at or what we could do. I do not know her. I have met her, just as I am meeting the committee members today.

An Cathaoirleach

I do not want to be disrespectful to Mr. Kelly, but he comes from a background selling chocolate and is now negotiating on behalf of the top stars in the country. He has had great success at that. How deals are done is a fascinating subject in a lot of people's minds. What does Mr. Kelly's leverage when negotiating derive from? RTÉ has previously told this committee that Mr. Tubridy and other popular stars who are very good at their job would walk. Mr. Kelly has said today that is not the case. Where does that leverage come from?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I come from a very hard-working, working-class background. Both my parents worked very hard. All they ever said to us was that if we wanted something, we had to work hard and then harder again.

An Cathaoirleach

I accept that. Where does the leverage come from?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I do not have leverage. I manage people who have no management, union or representative. I work with people who have contract-only-----

An Cathaoirleach

I will cut to the chase. Anybody who has ever done a bit of wheeling and dealing will know this. When someone is sitting in a negotiation, it is about whoever blinks first. If Mr. Kelly is negotiating with the top financial people, the legal people or the director general, where does his leverage derive from? There is a clear contradiction when it comes to his position. He comes from a background of sales and selling chocolate. I am not being derisory about that and fair play to him for having worked his way up, but where does the leverage come from? Mr. Kelly is not giving me an answer to that question.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I do not understand what the Cathaoirleach means by "leverage".

An Cathaoirleach

Where does Mr. Kelly's bargaining power come from? You need bargaining power when you are wheeling and dealing and involved in negotiations. Mr. Kelly is involved in serious negotiations-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

Sorry, I get the Chairman-----

An Cathaoirleach

I will clarify. Mr. Kelly knows what I am talking about here. He is involved in serious negotiations on behalf of stars. I ask him not to minimise this.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I am not trying to.

An Cathaoirleach

Where do the leverage and power derive?

Mr. Noel Kelly

It is not leverage or power. It is all based on facts, figures and commercial reality. One could say that someone else could have presented the shows instead, but over a period of six years, or from 2012 to 2020, Ryan Tubridy's shows earned-----

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

With the programme teams.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Yes, the teams are hugely important. It is a jigsaw of talent. Over those six years, Ryan Tubridy brought in €100 million in commercial revenue. In fairness, it was a hugely successful commercial operation. In 2021, RTÉ took in €148 million purely in commercial and not from the licence fee. It is a big-----

An Cathaoirleach

Mr. Kelly has outlined that well and I thank him for that. According to some of the documents, it seems that Mr. Kelly has significant influence and power in terms of negotiating at RTÉ. It has been said to me more than once over the years that he is the real director general at RTÉ. Does that have any basis in fact? It has been said not by somebody on the street corner but by people who work at RTÉ.

Mr. Noel Kelly

It is ridiculous. We do deals and we do contracts for our people.

I might be in RTÉ six times in a year. Equally, we work with the BBC and NBC, so it is not-----

An Cathaoirleach

Could I move to one of those deals for a moment? I refer to the tripartite deal between Mr. Kelly and Mr. Tubridy, Renault and RTÉ. It was a one-year deal from October 2020 to December 2021. We have been told from the start that it was a three-year deal, but it was not a three-year deal. It is here in front of me. I have it here. I read it carefully: that it was intended to be a three-year deal, but that is not seen in the contract anywhere. It is nowhere in the contract.

Mr. Noel Kelly

It was intended to be a five-year deal.

An Cathaoirleach

But it is not in the contract.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Right.

An Cathaoirleach

Could I ask Mr. Kelly this? He is used to signing contracts. Why did he expect RTÉ to underwrite the deal for three years when it was only a one-year deal?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Again, the relationship is with Renault and RTÉ.

An Cathaoirleach

But why did Mr. Kelly expect that?

Mr. Noel Kelly

All I wanted them to underwrite was that if the sponsor-----

An Cathaoirleach

Legally, Mr. Kelly was signing the deal. He knows that unless it is nailed down in the contract and signed on the dotted line, it does not stand for anything. Is that not correct? He knows that. He could not say, legally, the deal was for three years.

Mr. Noel Kelly

We had a separate contract for Ryan to do this, outside of his radio and TV work.

An Cathaoirleach

Will Mr. Kelly tell me why is there no figure mentioned in the contract? There is no figure of €75,000 per annum mentioned. Why is that?

Mr. Noel Kelly

I am sorry. Everything is in the pack, in the invoice, and in the instructions.

An Cathaoirleach

Mr. Kelly rubbished the side letter earlier on. He minimised the side letter earlier on in the meeting. The primary document is the tripartite agreement. Here we have a document with no figure mentioned in it; which was not signed up for a three-year deal, but Mr. Kelly is working on the basis that it is for a three-year deal.

The other question I want to ask Mr. Kelly is this - I have not heard a clear explanation for this – why was this contract only signed on 21 April this year when the 10-10-20 hit the fan?

Mr. Noel Kelly

Because it was a working document. The first one was supposed to be in 2020 and then 2021 and 2022.

An Cathaoirleach

A working document?

Mr. Noel Kelly

That is why to be honest.

An Cathaoirleach

A working document?

Mr. Noel Kelly

It was a working document insofar as it was about-----

An Cathaoirleach

Mr. Kelly is asking me, the committee, and the public to believe here today that he entered into an agreement that was not signed until this year; and that it was to run for three years, without having it nailed down legally and without the signature of his agency on it? That is cock and bull.

Mr. Noel Kelly

But the agreement, a Chathaoirligh, came from RTÉ to us.

An Cathaoirleach

I do not care where it came from. Mr. Kelly is a professional agent. People say he is very successful at it. Does he mean to tell me that he entered into this arrangement without it being tied down for three years, because that is the effect of it? Mr. Kelly did not sign it. Niamh McCormack signed it on 21 April 2023 on behalf of Mr. Kelly and Mr. Tubridy. RTÉ never signed it. There is no RTÉ signature on it.

Let me just say this to Mr. Kelly. What is also incredible is the second last line in the agreement says: "Once signed by all parties, this agreement will constitute a legally binding document and it is acknowledged that there is a valid consideration for this agreement." That is once it is signed by all parties. Is Mr. Kelly telling me he went along on a wing and a prayer with four major faults in this: no signatures - not signed; signed this year; no figures mentioned in it; and not a three-year deal? Mr. Kelly was happy as a professional agent to sign off on this. He is asking me to believe that.

Mr. Noel Kelly

The contract in total was brokered between ... the contract was with RTÉ and Renault, and we were the third party to this contract. We agreed to provide those services for €75,000 a year in a separate contract. That is what we did-----

An Cathaoirleach

Mr. Kelly and I know that you do not enter into agreements or contracts on the basis of a document like that. He knows that. Am I not correct in saying that?

Mr. Noel Kelly

But RTÉ had brokered the contract.

An Cathaoirleach

I do not care who brokered it. Mr. Kelly is telling me that he went along for three years on a wing and a prayer. That is what he is expecting us to believe here today-----

Mr. Noel Kelly

No.

An Cathaoirleach

I do not believe that.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Okay.

An Cathaoirleach

I do not believe him.

Mr. Noel Kelly

I was not going along on a wing and a prayer. Obviously, the events were pushed out because of Covid.

An Cathaoirleach

I do not care what was pushed out. There was nothing to stop the contract from coming in an envelope and for it to be signed. It could have been sent by courier to Mr. Kelly, and he could have signed it, back at that time, but he did not, and the figures were not in it. The three-year dimension was not in it. They are the facts. That deal is not credible the way it was framed.

Mr. Noel Kelly

Well, the deal was brokered by RTÉ.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Mr. Kelly.

We have gone through a lot of questions and we must finish because, in fairness to the two witnesses, they have come voluntarily and they have gone through three hours of questioning. Mr. Tubridy will be facing three more hours in the afternoon, so I want to be fair to him. He needs a break of an hour. I thank the witnesses for attending. I also want to thank the Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. Seamus McCarthy, and his staff for attending. Is it agreed that the clerk will seek any follow-up information and carry out any agreed actions arising from the meeting? Agreed. Is it also agreed that we note and publish the opening statements and briefing material provided for today's meeting? Agreed. I know they were long statements, but I wanted the witnesses to be able to read out their side of it.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Yes.

An Cathaoirleach

That was important.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

Gabh mo leithscéal, before I go, can I briefly say that I thank the committee for the courtesy they afforded us with their questions today? I am sure there are more pressing issues in the world but, at the same time, that is not to belittle what we were talking about today. I thank the committee members for their time.

An Cathaoirleach

I personally thank the witnesses for attending. They have probably heard me many times being quoted as saying that is really important to hear from the witnesses and to get them before the committee.

Mr. Ryan Tubridy

As we said, we respect the Oireachtas.

An Cathaoirleach

I want to thank them for their co-operation. The meeting of the Committee of Public Accounts is adjourned until 9.30 a.m. on Thursday, 13 July.

The witnesses withdrew.

The committee adjourned at 2.01 p.m. until 9.30 a.m. on Thursday, 11 May 2023.