Skip to main content
Normal View

Joint Committee on Tourism, Culture, Arts, Sport and Media debate -
Wednesday, 5 Jul 2023

Transparency of RTÉ Expenditure of Public Funds and Governance Issues: Discussion (Resumed)

I welcome the witnesses. Apologies have been received from Senator Shane Cassells.

The committee is meeting today with current and former representatives from RTÉ to resume our discussions and deliberations regarding recent revelations concerning the transparency of RTÉ's expenditure of public funds and governance issues, following the statements issued by the RTÉ board on 22 June 2023. At the outset of this meeting I wish to explain some limitations on parliamentary privilege and the practice of the Houses regarding references witnesses may make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence of witnesses who are physically present or who give evidence from within the parliamentary precincts is protected by absolute privilege pursuant to the Constitution and statute. However, a number of today's witnesses are giving evidence remotely and from outside the parliamentary precinct and, as such, may not benefit from the same level of immunity from legal proceedings as a witness who is physically present does. Witnesses may think it appropriate to take legal advice on this matter.

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

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. I also remind members again of the constitutional requirement that members must be physically present within the confines of Leinster House to participate in the public meetings. I cannot permit a member to attend where he or she is not adhering to that constitutional requirement and where a member is attending remotely. Any member who attempts to attend from outside the precincts will be asked to leave the meeting.

I also emphasise to members and witnesses alike again that it is imperative that today's meeting is conducted in a fair and respectful manner at all times. It is important, in the interest of natural justice, that members and witnesses act responsibly on utterances concerning those present today and concerning those who are not present. I will intervene in exchanges where I deem this not to be the case. I would also like to stress to colleagues and Members of the Houses that it is crucial that we hear and consider all of the evidence today before drawing any conclusions on matters arising. This is of the utmost importance so that the committee can conduct its work in as effective a manner as possible.

I now move to today's agenda. The committee welcomes representatives from RTÉ, both current and former, to resume discussions regarding the transparency of RTÉ's expenditure of public funds and governance issues arising from a statement issued by the RTÉ board on 22 June 2023. To that end, I welcome the representatives from RTÉ who are here. We have, again, the chair of the board, Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh; Mr. Adrian Lynch, interim deputy director general; Mr. Robert Shortt, member of the audit and risk committee and board staff representative; Mr. Richard Collins, chief financial officer; Ms Geraldine O'Leary, director of commercial; and Mr. Rory Coveney, director of strategy. They are all very welcome again. I also welcome Ms Anne O'Leary, chair of the audit and risk committee in RTÉ, who is joining the meeting today via Microsoft Teams. I hope she can hear and see us.

I remind everyone that an invitation was also issued to Mr. Jim Jennings, director of content, who regrettably cannot attend. We wish Mr. Jennings and Ms Dee Forbes speedy recoveries and extend the invitation to them to engage with the committee at a later date when they are able to do so.

I also welcome Ms Moya Doherty to the meeting today. She is the former chairperson of the board of RTÉ from 2014 until 2022. I also welcome Ms Breda O'Keeffe, former chief financial officer at RTÉ, from 2012 to 2020. They are both very welcome. An invitation to the meeting has also been extended to Mr. Noel Curran, the former director general of RTÉ, who regrettably had prior commitments but does hope to attend and engage with the committee on a future date.

The format of today's meeting is such that I will invite witnesses to deliver their opening statements, and for the ease of those presenting today I also propose to include a short comfort break approximately midway through the session. Is that agreed? Agreed. Our guests are probably aware, the committee will publish their opening statements on its web page. These will be followed by questions from members of the committee, each of whom will have ten minutes for questions and answers. I hope we will stick to that as much as possible so we can get as many people in as possible.

I call Ms Ní Raghallaigh to make her opening statement.

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

A Chathaoirligh, a Theachtaí Dála, agus a Sheanadóirí, go raibh maith agaibh as an deis teacht ar ais inniu chun ceisteanna a fhreagairt. We welcome yesterday's announcement by the Minister, Deputy Martin, of reviews into RTÉ's accounts, governance, and contractors. I welcome the fact an interrogation of the culture that has prevailed in RTÉ is integral to this process. I think it is fair to say that it is this culture, of careless stewardship and indifference to proper process, that has sown the seeds of the crisis that has shaken this institution to its core. Since I became chair and in dealing with this crisis, I have made every effort to pursue the facts, irrespective of where those facts might lead. An organisation devoted to truth telling can afford to do no less. I am not saying that we have got everything right, but it was the board who commissioned the Grant Thornton report and brought the initial facts into the light. It was the board who put the second Grant Thornton process in train. It was the board who brought disciplinary action against the former director general. Also, as I stated in my opening statement to the Committee of Public Accounts last week, it is the board who will drive the pursuit of the facts.

Bearing this in mind, I am deeply unhappy at the evident pattern of inconsistency and lack of completeness in the provision of information to date by the executive. Regrettably, this pattern has persisted. I believe there is a high probability that more information may emerge in the days and weeks ahead. As a board, we cannot fulfil our role to the highest standards when we cannot rely on the information provided. This is profoundly unsatisfactory as the work of the RTÉ board obviously depends on the communication of timely and accurate information from the executive. This has eroded board confidence in the executive.

I know I will be asked if the board has confidence in the executive.

Let me answer this as best I can. The executive is made up of nine people ranging from news and current affairs to legal, human resources, finance and so on. It is a diverse team reflecting the diversity of our organisation and its business. For me to provide a blanket "Yes" or "No" is deeply damaging to each of those individuals and the staff members who report to them. If there is a confidence issue, then there is a due process for that which will be employed as necessary. I am taking legal advice on issues that are emerging, and I would ask the committee to please respect that.

The incoming director general, Kevin Bakhurst, in consultation with the deputy director general, Adrian Lynch, has indicated his intention to reconstitute the executive. The board welcomes the decision to do so. I apologised numerous times last week, and on behalf of RTÉ I apologise again.

However, there is a significant caveat. The overwhelming majority, the silent majority, of RTÉ employees have nothing to apologise for. On the contrary, I want to apologise to them. They have been let down also. At what is undoubtedly the darkest period in RTÉ’s history it may seem odd to attempt to strike a positive note, but we owe this to the public and the staff of RTÉ. I hope this can be a cathartic period that will lead to a reformed and robust RTÉ. This organisation will be 100 years old in 2026. As the caretakers of this organisation, we owe it to the citizens to ensure that the good work which will happen over coming months delivers a public service media model that provides excellent news and current affairs, that engages and entertains, and that celebrates creativity in all its diverse forms. We also need to address the tension that results from the dual funding model. This will ultimately mean facing up to our funding dilemma, so we can deliver a durable fit for purpose funding model that does not overwhelm the core purpose of public service broadcasting.

Finally, without pre-empting the outcome of the process instigated by Government, I make one last recommendation today. The auditing of RTÉ’s finances was once a matter for the Comptroller and Auditor General. I feel it is time that it comes under the Comptroller and Auditor General’s purview once again.

I thank Ms. Ní Raghallaigh for her comprehensive opening statement. I call Mr. Adrian Lynch to make his opening statement.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I state, at the outset, that we are here to answer the committee's questions to the best of our ability. I am acutely aware of the accusations of drip-feed, of non-co-operation and lack of transparency. We fully respect and understand this public concern, our staff’s concern, and the focus on accountability from the Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas.

I apologise that, despite our best efforts, it was not possible to circulate many of the documents requested until late last night. Since the committee’s list of requests was issued last Friday, staff across the organisation have been working over past days to try to address this extensive list of queries raised by the committee, along with the additional 31 queries from the Committee of Public Accounts. Several of the issues being explored extend back some years and required additional verification. Other matters have legal implications, and external legal counsel advice is being sought as required. All of this is being done with the intention that we provide as much information as possible, and as early as possible. We remain mindful of the responsibilities of publishing this information, and we are treating the many complex issues arising from this investigation with due respect.

We also put on record to the members of this committee our profound regret, as an executive board, that the standards of governance on a number of issues was far lower than required. We extend our apology to the public, to our staff, stakeholders and partners, and to you as public representatives that our standards of transparency and professionalism fell short of what is rightly expected of us. RTÉ is comprised of extremely hard-working, talented and capable people. The current crisis is in no way a reflection of their work, or the high levels of integrity with which they operate. A public service media that does not enjoy public trust and confidence is missing its core purpose. RTÉ has been a valued organisation in Irish life. It provides a critical role in informing democracy, supporting the arts and our creative and production sectors, providing content for children on radio, television and online, for almost 100 years.

I also welcome the Minister's reviews into RTÉ.

I now call Ms Moya Doherty to make her opening statement. She is very welcome.

Ms Moya Doherty

I thank the Chair and Deputies.

I thank the committee for the opportunity to make an opening statement. RTÉ, for me and for many years, has been a constant in my life not merely as a source of information and debate on key national issues of culture and identity, but in my case as a place where I learned my creative skills and built a career. So embedded is RTÉ in my psyche that when the details of this crisis began to unfold it left me both professionally and personally bewildered and devastated.

As former chair I am horrified by the extent of operations of which the board and I had no knowledge. We did not know because we were never told. However, let me say that there were endless opportunities for the relevant executives to bring matters of concern to my attention, and have open conversations with me. I met executives in formal and informal situations regularly. I was available to meet in person or on the phone at anytime. A deliberate decision was taken not to inform the board of these issues. This should not have happened. What has come to light in the past few weeks confirms unacceptable behaviour and, like many others, there are questions to which I am looking forward to hearing comprehensive and detailed answers. The latest revelations suggest that unfortunately more questions will arise as the crisis deepens. My sincere hope is that the Minister's reviews can restore RTÉ to the levels of civic leadership and responsibility, which a public service media organisation ought to, and has to, represent.

Finally, I welcome Ms Breda O'Keeffe.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I am the former chief financial officer, CFO, of RTÉ. I held that role from September 2012 to February 2020. I left RTÉ's employment at the end of March 2020, more than three years ago. I document here the facts based on my recollections of events relating to the following matters. First, the top talent negotiation process during my tenure as CFO. Second, the Ryan Tubridy contract negotiation process for the 2020 to 2025 contract period. Third, the top talent earnings disclosures process during my tenure as CFO. Fourth, the top talent earnings disclosures process for the years 2017 to 2019, and the barter account.

On a point of clarification, the current CFO joined RTÉ in January 2020 and formally took over from me the responsibilities of the CFO role in February 2020. I continued to be involved in certain aspects of RTÉ finances during the period from January to March 2020, including Mr. Tubridy’s contract negotiations. I provided a comprehensive handover to the CFO during the period from January to late March 2020 on all aspects of the CFO role including the top talent negotiation process and all aspects of Mr. Tubridy’s contract negotiations to that point. Following my departure in March 2020, I was not contacted by the RTE CFO or any other personnel on any matter. I was not invited to contribute to the Grant Thornton report, which was presented to the audit and risk committee on Friday, 16 June 2023, and nor have I seen the report. I was not consulted or asked to comment on any aspect of RTÉ’s statement made on 27 June 2023. As a formal correction for the committee records of last week’s meeting, I believe the CFO was incorrect in his recollection that he was only in the CFO role for three days when the release of top talent earnings for 2017 to 2019 were released on 20 January 2021. The CFO was in office since January 2020.

I now turn to the top talent negotiations process during my tenure as CFO.

All top talent contract negotiations involved the director general, DG, the CFO, the head of content and the RTÉ internal solicitor at all stages of the negotiations. The head of news and current affairs was only involved if news and current affairs presenters were involved. The director general was not involved on a day-to-day basis in this process.

As CFO, I worked side by side with the RTÉ internal solicitor on the renewal of talent contracts. Contracts coming up for renewal were discussed at meetings held between the director general, CFO, head of content, head of news and current affairs, if required, and RTÉ solicitor to agree the parameters for the contract renewal. This group would decide on the broad parameters of the deal. As CFO, I and the RTÉ solicitor were then tasked with negotiation of contract renewal with the agent or presenter based on the agreed parameters.

Meetings were arranged with the agent or presenter between me and the RTÉ solicitor and offers were made in the meetings and were followed up by email detailing the meeting discussions. All draft contracts were prepared by the RTÉ solicitor and reviewed by both me and the head of content before they were issued. The head of content was updated and involved throughout the negotiation process and, in many cases, the presenter's agent spoke to the head of content directly around contract terms to assist in progressing the negotiations.

As CFO, I briefed the director general on the commercial terms of each contract before finalisation. Final contract terms and conditions were then agreed with the agent or presenter and the final contract was drafted by the RTÉ solicitor, which was reviewed by the CFO and by the head of content. My recollection is that final contracts were signed by the head of content or head of news and current affairs as applicable, and the DG was advised. A copy of the final contract was retained by me as CFO and the RTÉ solicitor and also sent to the head of content and head of news and current affairs, if appropriate.

Ms O'Keeffe, you have gone way over the allotted time. I see you have a very detailed statement and I think my colleagues would probably want to hear that in its entirety. I will allow you to proceed with the agreement of the committee members.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

Thank you very much. I really appreciate the opportunity.

The second area I wish to cover is Ryan Tubridy's contract negotiations for 2020 to 2025 up to the end of March 2020 when I left the organisation. My recollection of Mr. Tubridy’s contract for the period 2015 to 2020 is that it was for a five-year period, 2015 to August 2020. Service fees were stepped over the term. As an example, there were higher fees in later years compared to earlier years. The contract included an exit payment of €120,000 to be paid at the end of the contract in 2020 if the presenter remained at RTÉ for the full five-year period of his contract.

The financial objectives for the 2020 to 2025 contract negotiations with Mr. Tubridy were: to reduce the annual service fees by at least 15% per annum and the overall cost of the contract; to negotiate out the €120,000 exit fee owing under the 2015 to 2020 contract, which would represent a material saving to RTÉ; and to start the contract on 1 Jan 2020 instead of August 2020 so that the cost savings would start earlier.

In autumn 2019, a contract renewal proposal was developed between the director general, CFO, head of content and the RTÉ solicitor. I do not recall the level of annual service fees we agreed to offer to the agent at that time. I do recall that the proposed offer, if agreed, would deliver significant cost reductions to RTÉ of more than €500,000 over the contract term. This included the waiver of the €120,000 exit fee in the existing contract. The head of news and current affairs was not involved in Mr. Tubridy’s contract negotiations.

During autumn 2019, I, as CFO, and the RTÉ solicitor managed the negotiation process and made financial offers to the agent. These offers were rejected and negotiations came to a stalemate position in November and December 2019. I was aware that the head of content was in contact with the agent outside of the normal process to try to find a solution during this period, as he told me so. The negotiation meetings and offers made were documented by me and the RTÉ solicitor by email. The director general and the head of content were updated on the negotiations at every stage by me and the RTÉ solicitor.

I was advised by either the director or the head of content - I cannot recall which one - that a separate commercial arrangement had been proposed to be added to the financial offer then on the table. My recollection is that this was in December 2019. This commercial arrangement between Mr. Tubridy and a commercial partner, which was later identified to me as Renault, was to be facilitated by RTÉ. The proposal was that Mr. Tubridy would host a number of events for Renault and would be paid a fee by Renault for these services. In this proposal, RTÉ was not to be party to the contract, nor was RTÉ liable for any element or obligation under the contract. There was no cost to RTÉ in this proposed arrangement. I was requested by either the director general or the head of content - I cannot recall which one - to write to Mr. Tubridy’s agent advising him of a potential commercial arrangement to be facilitated by RTÉ and I did so.

I spoke to the head of commercial and briefed her as she had the relationship with Renault and would make the necessary introductions. The head of commercial told me she spoke to Renault about a one-year deal with a possible extension for a further two years. My recollection is that the head of commercial advised me that Renault was happy for Mr. Tubridy to host events and saw value in this proposal.

As far as I can recollect, in early 2020, the head of commercial advised me that as Renault had already agreed cost budgets for 2020, the arrangement would need to be cost neutral for Renault in the first year. This gave rise to a potential rebate to Renault and this potential rebate to Renault was known to me, the RTÉ solicitor, director general and head of content. I understood this rebate, if agreed, would be assigned to Mr. Tubridy’s RTÉ earnings for 2020. There was never any suggestion otherwise.

My recollection is that Mr. Tubridy’s agent requested that the commercial agreement be underwritten by RTÉ and this was refused. This continued to be my position and, as far as I am aware, that of the director general, head of content and the RTÉ solicitor, up to the date of my departure from RTÉ in March 2020. I was not aware that any guarantee had issued until I heard about it last week in media reports.

As part of the negotiation with Mr. Tubridy, RTÉ proposed the exit fee of €120,000 in the 2015 to 2020 contract be waived by Mr. Tubridy. Following discussions with both the RTÉ group financial controller and the RTÉ people payments manager, I contacted RTÉ’s auditors, Deloitte, to consider options as to how the cancellation of the €120,000 exit fee could be treated for top talent earnings reporting, if Mr. Tubridy waived his entitlement to that payment. Some preliminary modelling of this option was done and discussed fully with the auditors. However, this was not concluded when I left, and I do not know if the exit fee was waived and, if so, how it was treated in the top talent reported earnings. Throughout the period January to March 2020, I briefed the new CFO on all aspects of Mr. Tubridy’s negotiations as they progressed.

After I left RTÉ in March 2020, I had no further involvement in the negotiation of Mr. Tubridy’s contract nor was I contacted by anyone from RTÉ on any aspect of the negotiation or on any commercial agreement or on the earnings treatment of the exit fee waiver. When I left in March 2020, an RTÉ guarantee on the proposed Renault agreement was not on offer, as far as I was aware.

The third area I would like to mention is the top talent earnings disclosure process during my tenure as CFO. The responsibility for the final calculations and ensuring external audit sign-off of the top talent earnings figures to be released was my responsibility as CFO for the years up to and including 2016. Top talent earnings were reported on an accruals basis; that means amounts paid and payable for the period.

As CFO, I maintained documentation on top talent earnings by presenters, which showed published audited earnings from 2008, draft calculations for periods yet to be published and draft projected earnings for future periods based on known contracts. I regularly communicated with, and met, the people payments manager and group financial controller on talent earning calculations and payments under the various contracts. This was a key control in the process.

As part of the finalisation of top talent earnings calculations for the year, another key control in the process was meeting with the people payments manager and the group financial controller to compare the actual payments made to each top talent in the year to the expected earnings for that year as projected by the CFO. Occasionally, differences could arise where presenters were paid by RTÉ for additional services provided and not included in the main services contract.

In such cases, these additional earnings were added to the main services contract earnings to give the reported earnings. Once the draft top talent earnings were prepared by the CFO and agreed with the people payments manager and the group financial controller, the group financial controller engaged with RTÉ’s external auditors to audit the earnings before they were reported. The audit of the top talent earnings by RTÉ’s external auditors was a key part in the overall process to ensure the accuracy of the reported earnings before release and to ensure consistency of reporting with prior years. When I left RTÉ in March 2020, the earnings for 2017 and 2018 had been audited by RTÉ’s external auditors. Before I left RTÉ in March 2020, I fully briefed the new CFO on all aspects of the top talent contracts and their status. As part of this hand-over to the new CFO, it is my recollection that I provided all documentation relating to top talent earnings.

On top talent earnings disclosures in the years 2017 to 2021, top talent earnings are typically released two to three years in arrears for commercial sensitivity reasons. On top talent earnings disclosures for the years 2017 through 2021, here are the timelines. For the year 2017 they were released on 20 January 2021; for the year 2018 on 20 January 2021; for the year 2019 on 20 January 2021; for the year 2020 on 15 February 2023; and for the year 2021 on 15 February 2023. These release dates, which I located on the web, are all after I left RTÉ, and I was not involved in the above reporting process for these years.

I will address the barter trading account on the basis of my recollections. Barter trading is a standard industry mechanism for selling surplus advertising air time which a broadcaster cannot sell itself. Rather than surplus advertising time expiring and going to waste, RTÉ engaged a UK barter agent Astus whose business is to deliver value through the media buying process in order to generate additional commercial revenue. Astus were allocated RTÉ surplus air time to sell. Astus gave RTÉ 50% value in cash and the remaining 50% provided goods and services to RTÉ and also covered the barter agent’s fees. The barter agent’s fees covered both the selling of the air time to customers and the procurement of requested goods and services. I cannot recall the barter agent's fee level. The services provided to RTÉ through barter trading are typically hotels, airlines and air time with other media organisations. The cost of services provided through barter was charged to the RTÉ department cost centre who used the services, flights, hotels, etc. The cost of the bartered services was covered by the relevant department’s existing budget. Bartered services were not in addition to existing budgets. That is my recollection.

RTÉ finance had financial control of the barter account and received regular statements from the barter company. Operational control of the barter account was with the RTÉ commercial department. Both income and expenditure from barter trading was recorded in the RTÉ accounts and was accounted for each month. Any expense discharged from the barter account was documented and every expense met from the barter account was accounted for within RTÉ in the same manner as if it had been paid for in cash. It is my recollection that during my tenure as CFO, the annual value of bartered air time at RTÉ amounted to approximately €300,000 per annum out of total commercial income of €180 million per annum. Of the approximate €300,000, 50% was paid in cash, the remaining 50% was used to provide services to RTÉ which it would be buying anyway, and pay barter agent’s fees. This was all funded by surplus air time RTÉ was unable to sell. I thank the committee for its time.

I thank Ms O'Keeffe and thank my colleagues for their forbearance in allowing that long statement. I think it was important in light of our hearing the last day. I will go to questions now with my colleagues. First up is Deputy Griffin who has ten minutes.

Why did Mr. Collins tell the Oireachtas last week that there was only one barter account?

Mr. Richard Collins

The reason for that is because there is one barter account. There are three companies feeding into that barter account but what I look at is a consolidated view. For instance, if someone was to ask the Deputy what his weekly shopping bill is, he would not say his weekly bill was €70 with Dunnes, €70 with Super Valu and €60 with Lidl. He would say his weekly shopping bill was €200.

Do you stand over the answer you provided last week?

Mr. Richard Collins

I am saying that there is one barter account in terms of how it is looked at financially but there are three companies feeding into it. What I would say is that everything is disclosed, all the transactions. There is nothing new here. They are all treated in the same way, the three companies. Everything was brought onto the balance sheet together.

When I got this documentation earlier, I had to go looking around Leinster House in order to get a printer big enough to print it off because there was too much stuff for A4 pages. The people tuning in will not be able to see all this but I will go through a few of the sheets. I am looking at 2016 RTÉ agency and clients summer party, venue, catering and drinks, €20,900. That does not come under the categories that were just referred to by the former CFO. Looking at 2017, I see an agency breakfast and lunch series, four days with clients, agencies and presenters - €13,388. God only knows what they were eating over four days but that is a hell of a bill. The amount listed in respect of a Bruce Springsteen concert was €12,000. It appears that was in 2016. Head of sales, client, agency golf outing, jackets, golf balls - €7,500. Phil Collins and Robbie Williams at the Aviva Stadium, 50 tickets at a cost of €6,358. I have heard of "Let Me Entertain You" but that is a bit ridiculous. Then there were 200 units of flip-flops bought for the summer party for agencies and clients at a cost of €4,956. That is €34 per pair. This is what is going through this account. This is not the barter account; it is a slush fund. All of these entries ask more questions of RTÉ. Who was benefiting? Who knew what? Why was this expenditure not showing up? When this was transferred to the balance sheet in 2020, Ms Doherty was chair of the board. Did this come up at meetings of the board?

Ms Moya Doherty

No, we were not aware of the existence of the barter account. I have checked back with my colleagues. Two of my former colleagues on the board----

You were not aware.

Ms Moya Doherty

----were accountants and one was the former CFO of the Economist group in the UK. I contacted him this week and asked him if he knew anything of these activities and he replied "No".

On the one hand, we are being told that barter accounts are a normal part of a media organisation and, on the other hand, the former chairperson did not know that there was a barter account in the organisation.

Ms Moya Doherty

That is correct.

Do you think you should have known?

Ms Moya Doherty

I think I should have been informed. All my colleagues on the board should have been informed. This should have been highlighted to us.

What I am sensing from you is that you are waiting there to be informed of all these things. As a board, is your job not to scrutinise what is going on in the organisation as well? Do you think you did not scrutinise enough or did not keep a close enough eye on what was going on?

Ms Moya Doherty

A board has three ways of gaining oversight for information. One is information that is given directly by managers and executives. The second is the audited accounts. The third possibility is being told something off the record.

Ms Doherty was the chair of the remuneration committee. Is that right?

Ms Moya Doherty

That is correct.

Why did the committee only meet once per annum in the crucial period from 2018 to 2023?

Ms Moya Doherty

I do not have the details of the meetings for that period.

I will tell you now. It met once in 2018, once in 2019, it did not meet at all in 2020 - that is fair enough - it met once in 2021 and did not meet at all in 2022. I understand it has met once so far in 2023. For the relevant period, particularly in 2018 and 2019, why did it go from three meetings in 2017 down to one? At the same time, the audit and risk committee and the programmes committee were meeting between four and seven times each year.

Ms Moya Doherty

Yes, that is correct. In my role as chair of the remuneration committee, I was in constant contact with the director general and others about issues to do with contracts. I was out of operation for six months in the latter part of 2019. I think the then deputy chair took that meeting.

In that time, Ms Doherty was able to attend six out of eight full board meetings in 2018, five out of eight in 2019, six out of eight in 2020 and eight out of nine in 2021. The remuneration committee just seems to be way down the pecking order in terms of priority. This is at a time when there were payments going out through the barter account.

Who else was on the committee?

Ms Moya Doherty

The chair of the audit and risk, Ms Anne O'Leary, and in advance of that, other board colleagues. They changed over the period.

Was the DG on that board?

Ms Moya Doherty

No. The DG would be invited to the board to raise information, as required.

Will Ms Doherty furnish the committee with all the minutes of those meetings please?

Ms Moya Doherty

Absolutely.

It is important that we would have that. Writing in the Sunday Independent last week, the journalist Shane Ross raised a number of issues regarding the importance of that committee and why it was not meeting at that crucial time and those questions need to be answered.

In regard to Toy Show The Musical, €2.2 million was lost. By my rough calculations that equals the television licence fee from every household in the town of Tralee and every household in the town of Killarney. Then RTÉ still goes on to say it is proud of the achievement. If that is what RTÉ is proud of, we might as well all pack up and go home. How can a loss of €2.2 million be justified and then stood over as something to be proud of? That is an enormous loss. It is a disgrace; it is a scandal.

Mr. Rory Coveney

We took a creative and commercial risk for the best of reasons to try to create something unique for Irish families and for children at Christmas.

It was unique alright.

Mr. Rory Coveney

I am not sure if anyone here was at the show. Those who attended absolutely loved it, in particular, children. It clearly was not a commercial success but that was not for lack of effort from everyone involved. We did a huge amount of work trying to model that.

How were the losses paid for?

Mr. Rory Coveney

They were paid from RTÉ funds.

Was that out of the central fund?

Mr. Rory Coveney

Yes.

Did anybody along the way advise that this was not a good idea?

Mr. Rory Coveney

We had a lot of advice from people in musical theatre, specialists who had produced significant productions in the past.

Did anyone advise that it was not a good idea within RTÉ?

Mr. Rory Coveney

No. We were aware of the risks.

Did anyone say, "Stop, this is not a good idea"?

Mr. Rory Coveney

No.

In regard to advertising, I was looking through the accounts earlier and my head was wrecked. The advertisement for Toy Show The Musical was broadcast during every commercial break last autumn. It took up a great deal of airtime. Were the advertisements free from RTÉ for advertising this? Where earnings foregone by the station because of the displacement factor, with this being advertised so heavily?

Mr. Rory Coveney

RTE has promotional airtime, which is non-commercial airtime to promote its own services and its own programmes. It does not, therefore, come out of commercial airtime.

Was no commercial airtime was taken up by the advertisements for this show?

Mr. Rory Coveney

No. We bought commercial airtime on non-RTÉ stations but the RTÉ airtime comes from promotional airtime, which is where we promote our programmes and services such as the concert orchestra, sporting events and so forth.

When I looked into the funding models, I was looking at one particular programme, The Movie Show, of which I believe Mr. Lynch was the producer back in 2012. Would that be classed as advertiser funded programming, AFP?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Correct, it was public broadcasting service, PBS, with production support.

It was money from Ford.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Correct.

Did Mr. Lynch bring the money from Ford to RTÉ first or did he pitch the programme first and then find Ford?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

To my memory, we pitched the programme through Ogilvy and Mather at the time.

Is Mr. Lynch sure that is the order of events?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I am trying to remember.

Will he find out and come back to me?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Absolutely.

Would he stand over the commissioning of that show today and the way it was done?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Yes, I would.

Does he not think editorial input by an advertiser compromises the organisation's mission statement?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

There was no editorial input from the advertiser.

Can he confirm that and come back to us with the documentation?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I can confirm that here. I will take it away and come back to the Deputy.

Should RTÉ stars benefit from private podcasts, for example, that actually act as competition to RTÉ? Does anyone have an opinion on that? There are an awful lot of them now who are paid by RTÉ but also have their own private podcasts from which they make money. Is there going to be a review of this? Are people conflicted?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

To be clear, anyone who is an RTÉ staff member in terms of the employee guidelines would have to seek permission to do any commercial activity outside of their job.

Will Mr. Lynch confirm that there is permission for those people to do all of those podcasts? There seems to be a history of blurred lines in RTÉ. Ms Doherty will be very much aware of concern about the overlap between RTÉ and Riverdance in the past, which she did very well out of. Does RTÉ need seriously to look at itself in regard to drawing a clear line between RTÉ employees and what they do in their own private time in terms of earnings?

Ms Moya Doherty

I believe that there is need for a debate on the tension between commercial and public service. I have been calling for that for some time.

Does Ms Doherty believe she was conflicted in the past?

Ms Moya Doherty

Absolutely not.

She does not believe that others might look at it and say, "That does not look right"?

Ms Moya Doherty

In everything that I did in my negotiations with RTÉ, if the Deputy is going back to 1994, there was no conflict.

Did Ryan Tubridy or his agent actually refuse to take a pay cut? Will the witnesses clarify that? Did he say, "No, I am not taking a cut" or did his agent on his behalf?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

During my negotiations, up to March 2020, they did not refuse to take a cut. It was the level of cut that we disagreed on. There was a cut. I cannot recall the level of service fees as per my statement but when I left RTÉ, the level of fees we were discussing was lower than he was earning under his contract. He was not rejecting.

Who else here was aware of the July 2020 letter guaranteeing there would be no fee reductions? Let us remember that the country was in an awful state at that stage. Businesses had shut down and had not reopened. There was huge uncertainty. Who thought this was okay to be signed?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I was aware of that.

Did Mr. Lynch think it was not a great idea?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

My understanding was that his salary was to be reduced and, within that, there was a guarantee but I did not see the side letter. I was aware there was a side letter, a commercial agreement and a substantive contract but I did not know what the wording was around that in terms of any contingencies that would be put in.

It was not a great bit of business and a lot of people are very angry about it. At the time there was huge uncertainty. Mr. Collins knew about it as well.

Mr. Richard Collins

At a meeting I attended on 30 April, it was discussed. At that meeting it was proposed that wording would be put into it. Obviously Covid-19 was in progress at that stage. Nobody knew how bad it was going to get but it was proposed to put into the letter that, in the event of the crisis continuing-----

That was how the letter was described. That somehow escaped the page.

Mr. Richard Collins

It did. I never saw the final letter but that was the last discussion I was aware of.

To conclude then, when RTÉ executives took pay cuts some time ago, car allowances were introduced in lieu. Is that right? Is anyone here in receipt of the car allowance?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Yes, I am.

Was that introduced at a time after pay cuts?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I joined RTÉ seven-and-a-half years ago and as part of my contract there was a car allowance.

I take it everyone who has the car allowance has a car.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Yes.

Are there people in the organisation who do not have a car still availing of the car allowance? Is it vouched?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

In regard to all of that, we will get on to it later in terms of RTÉ personnel commercially benefiting from anything. As I said, we are-----

Will details be provided about who is in receipt of it?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Yes, 100%.

Will Mr. Lynch advise us also whether it is vouched?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

We have a lot of the detail. There is a good deal of incoming to our DPO in terms of releasing information with personal names in it but we are doing a forensic tour of the entire organisation to establish that.

I thank Deputy Griffin and call Deputy Munster.

I thank the Cathaoirleach. Ms O'Keeffe wanted to interject on that topic. I ask her to please be as brief as possible.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I just wanted to say that the car allowance was not introduced at the same time as the reduction in pay. Car allowances were in place beforehand. I cannot recall the date.

In regard to the one barter account, will Mr. Collins advise us whether it was always the case that three accounts fed into one? Was there ever a case where there was more than one barter account?

Mr. Richard Collins

There were two barter companies feeding into it up until the end of 2021 and then a third barter company came onstream.

There were two barter companies up until the end of 2021 and then a third.

Mr. Richard Collins

Miroma came onstream at the end of 2021.

What was the nature of that?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

The reason they came to us was because of a particular insurance client that wanted to advertise through Miroma and came to us through Miroma.

Were each of those three companies on the barter account all paid the 35% handling fees?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

Yes.

What would the cost to RTÉ would be at the end of each year if all three separate companies were going into the one barter account, with each paying a 35% fee on every single transaction?

Each of those paying are 35% fees on every single transaction. That is some money.

Mr. Richard Collins

Over the life of this barter account, based on the information supplied to the committee yesterday, the total gross cost going through the barter account was €1.6 million but the net cost that RTÉ got the benefit of was about €1 million. So these figures were in the region of €600,000.

So we would have paid an additional €600,000.

Mr. Richard Collins

That is what the fees were over the life of the barter account.

That is 35% in handling fees which amounted to €600,000.

What would be the standard handling fee on average going through RTÉ’s barter account? Speaking to different people, I have yet to come across someone who said that they have ever heard of a 35% handling fee. It is not the norm, is it?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

No. If may be able to help. As we have said, most of our business comes through media agencies and the standard commission level with media agencies is 15%.

It is15%. So we are paying 20% over and above the standard fees-----

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

For business-----

----- so we are paying double and more.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

That is for business that we would not normally get.

But RTÉ is handing over one third of it back.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

We have tried to explain it in an explanatory note but 50% of the money goes directly into cash. It is the other 50% which is cashed out at .66 and it is actually .33.

Yes, but the point is that the average handling fees would be 15% but here we are paying 35% handling fees which is over double the cost of the average of such fees.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

That is correct, on extra revenue we would not get.

Yes, but it would not be extra for much longer if we keep paying those sort of fees.

Who actually wrote the explanatory note on the barter account furnished to the committee today?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Those were inputs from our accounts team together with Ms O’Leary and her commercial team.

That was Ms O’Leary-----

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

It was a combination of people.

I read through it and I thought that RTÉ is showing utter contempt for this committee. If one reads through it, it states that the barter accounts:

...are used by RTÉ solely in the context of [its] commercial activity of selling advertising airtime. A barter account may be used for the purpose of hospitality and entertainment in relation to advertising clients/media agencies to ensure that RTÉ can continue to increase its advertising revenue and to retain [its growth] going forward.

.... It appears on the balance sheet of RTÉ, and the appropriate controls are in place regarding oversight and spend.

That is simply not true. It is in fact a lie because the barter account was used to funnel secret top-up payments to Ryan Tubridy. It used the barter account to raise false invoices under the heading of consultancy fees.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

First, there is no intention to show contempt to anybody in this situation but-----

Am I incorrect in what I have said?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

In 2022, we raised two invoices on the barter account. That was the first time ever, as I have said before, that I was asked to do that to pay talent. For the previous ten years we have used it as described.

So that this was just a once-off is some sort of an excuse for funnelling secret top-up payments through a barter account. RTÉ had the cheek to have this drawn up when it is an absolute lie, when RTÉ has a record of raising false invoices and of funnelling through a barter account in an effort to conceal top-up payments.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

The aim of the note was to expand what a barter account is. It is quite complicated-----

That is to explain what it is if one is doing the right thing, if there is good governance and proper oversight. This sneaky and underhand deal that was done was designed to deceive, as the Chairperson has said, and was done through this barter account under Ms O’Leary’s watch and supervision.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

If I can answer, I would like to say that I was not part of the intention to deceive-----

Yes, right, give it a rest will you, for goodness sake?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

Well, that is my true statement, my truth.

Ms O’Leary raised the invoices under the heading of consultancy fees knowing full well that they were payment for Ryan Tubridy. Is that correct?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

Yes, I knew they were payments for Ryan Tubridy but I did not know what agreement had been made for them and what services-----

It does not matter as Ms O’Leary knew that those payments were for Ryan Tubridy and she raised those invoices and put them through under the heading of consultancy fees which is false accountancy, whether she looks at it that way or not. Ms O’Leary then sent in that statement today in the full knowledge that there was no oversight and that she did what she did-----

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

I did what I was told to do.

----- and she insulted this committee by sending in the explanatory note on barter accounts. If only she had done it the way it was supposed to be done, then perhaps we would not be here.

I want to raise the issue of the Renault deal. Again, it appears to me that extreme lengths were gone to in order to pay Ryan Tubridy the first €75,000. I am aware that we ended up paying three €75,000 payments. The first €75,000 was for the appearances. When we spoke about those, what was the total cost of that Renault deal to the taxpayer?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

That was from the barter account which was based on additional commercial campaigns and commercial revenues. I understand the Deputy’s view that it is public money but I know it is important and that it was a single pot-----

It is public money. What was the total cost of the deal because if one looks through the barter accounts which we were furnished with this morning, there are underlined payments, building cost sets of €22,000, accommodation costs of €1,200 and there are the three payments for the gig, which cost €47,000, so what was the total cost to the taxpayer?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

I want to give an accurate answer but it was 115 by 2, plus the number which we published last year which I believe was 40.

That is 115 by 2. What was that for?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

That was the €75,000 that was cashed out at .65, which is 115 for the two years. Then there were the events, which from memory is just under €40,000.

Would those events of under €40,000 have included the building cost for the three sets, because they came in at €22,000?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

To the best of my understanding, that would be the case.

The payments for the gigs were €47,000 and there were accommodation costs of €1,200. That does not amount to €40,000.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

My apologies as I thought that the Deputy was talking about the cost of actually hosting or setting up the gigs.

I asked Ms O’Leary what was the total cost of the Renault deal.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

I will come back to the Deputy with all of the costs added up.

Did Ms O’Leary not think that our committee would want to see that today?

I want to come on to the slush fund, for want of a better word, as one of my colleagues mentioned the 200 flip-flops at a cost of €5,000. One thinks of RTÉ crying poverty and looking for an increase in the licence fee when this type of Celtic tiger splurging was going on.

There was one thing which I noticed. There were ten tickets purchased for the IRFU and it was said that only six were kept for commercial use. Where did the other four tickets go or to whom?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

We originally had ten tickets and then when we renewed the deal we got six. I was not aware ... the first deal that was agreed-----

Did RTÉ not purchase ten?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

No, we purchased ten under the support and permission of Noel Curran when he was director general. When we were replacing them, we reduced it to six because we knew it was expensive. The tickets I was responsible for were originally ten in number, as agreed by Mr. Curran, and these were then reduced to six.

I want to touch back on some of those jollies, if you like, when it comes down to costs, etc. Would it be standard practice in any company - I was listening to Ms O’Leary last week - for family members and friends to attend functions? I have been given information here that in Ms O’Leary’s case, as the commercial director, her husband would have attended many of these events, and many more than I had mentioned last week.

In general, if one is at work, one is at work. I do not bring my husband to the restaurant here or to the canteen and I do not have him tagging along because I am at work. He does not bring me to his workplace. It is Ms O’Leary’s job to entertain these clients so in the corporate governance sense why would Ms O’Leary’s husband come along with her to every single event, whether it is accessing matches, Fleetwood Mac concerts, and I could go on and on, with tickets purchased by RTÉ, when another potential commercial interest or advertiser could use that ticket?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

I have had a very clear policy on plus ones which I-----

Yes, plus ones are all well for the client, an advertising client or whoever else, but I am talking about Ms O’Leary herself bringing the hubby along to concerts, dining, and who can name what other event?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

As I have said, and the Deputy may or may not know, I am due to retire at the end of next month and my job is currently being advertised.

Developing and managing key senior level client and agency relationships is key. Stakeholder management skills and ability to build rapport and create credible trust in strong working relationships-----

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

That is a key part of what I do.

Ms O'Leary used the words "credible trust" after what we have heard over the past two weeks.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

If the Deputy were to speak to my clients and the people who, during the period of the past 11 years, brought in-----

I am sure they would have plenty to say.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

Sorry. Can I finish, Deputy?

I am sure they would get high praise in view of the lavish extravagance that was splurged on them. How could they have anything but high praise? When Ms O'Leary talks about credible trust and given what we have heard from her this week and last, there is a big question mark over that. I do not think there are many who would disagree with me.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

Am I allowed to respond?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

We also provided the committee with the information that across that 11-year period. I was responsible for bringing in revenue of €1.65 billion.

That is your job.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

Yes, that absolutely is my job. However, part of that job is maintaining relationships. This is people selling to people. RTÉ has a very good track record of retaining clients. Client retention is key. Over the period when I brought in €1.65 billion, we spent 0.1%, as the Deputy knows. As a cost of business compared with any other media or tech company, I think this stacks up. It may be unusual because we are dual funded but I answer for the commercial side.

Given what we know-----

Deputy Munster, please conclude because we are way over time.

Yes. Given what we know now about raising the false invoices and funnelling the money through the barter account for secret top-up payments, can Ms O'Leary honestly say, as commercial director, that her position is tenable?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

I guess that is not for me to decide. However, as I said, I am due to retire in eight weeks' time, so I will have a conversation with Kevin Bakhurst when he comes in next week. From my side, I am not sure that my position is tenable because the invasion into my privacy, the effect on my mental health and, most importantly, the erroneous reports on both Twitter and in newspapers about me and my husband has crossed a line that I do not find acceptable. For the record, my husband and I paid for our own hotels and flights to Chicago. I would like to say that for the record.

I thank our secretariat, and I am quite certain there were many people in RTÉ working on this as well because quite a lot of documentation had to be prepared for today. We are still going through much of it. I am grateful that it has been provided.

One of the elements relates to the pay scales of the top 100 within RTÉ. That includes, with regard to those paid at senior levels, a number of the senior executives. When Dee Forbes, former director general, came before the Oireachtas, she indicated that those at the top levels within RTÉ all took a 15% pay cut in 2020 and 2021. This issue arises essentially because it appears that Ryan Tubridy did not take that pay cut. Did all of the executives in RTÉ take a 15% pay cut at the time? Did the 15% pay cut also apply to the 100 listed?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

It was a 10% pay cut that we took at the time, and it did not apply to anyone outside of the executive board. The board also waived their fees. No one beneath the executive board took a pay cut.

Mr. Lynch may recall that last week I raised the issue of external commercial activity. We are receiving the levels of payments coming from RTÉ but there is much concern around external payments. I raised the question of a register of interests. Unusually, just after Mr. Lynch appeared before our committee, details appeared of somebody in RTÉ filming a car advert on the RTÉ premises. Can I get an assurance that a register of interest, similar to that which applies to all of us in the political sphere, will be drawn up for all personnel and senior executives in RTÉ?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Yes, we can.

When will that be in place?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Regarding the process, there are 1,800 employees. It is very clear in our journalism guidelines - 5.3 relates to potential conflicts of interest. I will not read it here. There is also the employee handbook. If employees do not have permission from their line manager, there is a process around that. Contractors - just to be clear because there has been a lot of press around that - will have other relationships. They need to clear those at RTÉ to make sure there is no editorial conflicts. But I cannot-----

Will they be published?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Regarding the contractors, no, because they are independent entities. Regarding the staff, we are doing up the terms of reference, we are centralising everything at the moment and we will have a register of interest that will be fully transparent.

We need one for contractors as well because we know one of the difficulties is between people who are directly employed by RTÉ and contractors. We need to know any of those who have contractual relationships; they need to be included.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Correct. At the moment, just to be clear in respect of the information I have been provided with, obviously there are concerns around the DPO, but from across the organisation, I have: staff, name, division, where they are actually operating, any commercial activity, whether they are staff or a contractor and whether it has been approved or not. There are issues with the DPO but I have all that information centralised now. We have done that since last Thursday.

I wish to thank Ms O'Keeffe in particular. In fairness, I appreciate that she is not obliged to appear before the committee. I find her statement quite comprehensive and it has been of help to the committee. She made it clear that she was aware - I refer back to questions that I put last week as well - of Ryan Tubridy's contract.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

Very much so. Yes, as per my statement, I was working on the negotiations at a very detailed level.

When Ms O'Keeffe did the crossover with Mr. Collins, who succeeded her as CFO, for a point of clarity, he would have been aware of the detail of that contract.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

Yes.

I am concerned because Mr. Collins informed me last week-----

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

Sorry. I wish to add that, just to clarify, it was the status of the contract at the point in time when I left.

I totally appreciate that.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

-----as well, just because in her statement Ms O'Keeffe refers to the director of content. It is important that for all of these hearings, he has been extremely unwell and has not been available. He is keen to come and give witness testimony. It is important to say - I spoke to him this morning ahead of this - that his role in this is editorial. That is his job. I just want to make that clarification.

I appreciate that but I am looking at Mr. Lynch's direct answers to my questions last week. I asked who was in the room with Noel Kelly and he made clear that the CFO, somebody from the legal department and the director general were in the room for the negotiations with Noel Kelly at all times. I wish to ask Ms O'Keeffe whether it is correct that at all times in the negotiations with Noel Kelly, as is her recollection, that she as CFO was there, somebody from the legal department and the director general were there.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I cannot confirm that.

Okay. I appreciate-----

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I am sorry. I am not trying to evade. It is just that I was not at all of the meetings. The majority of the meetings around the contract negotiations were a broader team. That is the way our process operated.

I am assuming it is fair to say that as part of a process like this, Ms O'Keeffe as the CFO, along with the head of legal, because somebody obviously is-----

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

Correction. It was not the head of legal; it was the RTÉ solicitor.

Yes, the RTÉ solicitor would be aware as well as the director general. Was there anybody else aware of the contract, as far as Ms O'Keeffe knew at the time?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I wish to clarify. We had-----

The original negotiation for the Ryan Tubridy contract.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

As my statement says, the people involved in the negotiation, whether they were meetings, communications that would have been an informal meeting or phone calls, were myself as CFO, the head of content, the solicitor and DG.

So Jim Jennings would have been aware of some of the detail as well, particularly with regard to the Renault deal.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

My recollection is that he was aware of that.

Would he have raised it with the executive board at the time? Did Jim Jennings bring up the Renault deal at the executive board level at any stage?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

Typically, and I was also on the executive board as well, we did not discuss detailed talent contracts at the executive. As I explained in my statement, they were part of a separate process of a perhaps smaller group.

Who would have known about that, within that smaller group?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

To clarify, does the Senator mean the general negotiations?

The Renault deal. I suppose that is what we are looking at.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

The Renault deal. Before I left the organisation, it was, as my statement states, a separate commercial arrangement facilitated by RTÉ, in which Ryan would provide services to Renault. There was a separate payment to be made between the parties. At that stage, before I left the organisation, who was aware of that deal? Myself, the director general, the head of content, Geraldine O'Leary and Richard Collins were aware of that deal.

They would all have been aware.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I said in my opening statement at the joint Oireachtas committee in session one that I was aware a deal was being done with Renault. I wish to state I was not involved-----

What we are getting to here is around the levels of knowledge of the original contract and who knew what. That is why I asked very specific questions around who was in the room and who knew. This is part of the problem - it clearly seems that people did not speak to each other around elements of the deal. I wish to come back to Mr. Collins. When I put the question to him, and I acknowledged he had only been in RTÉ since 2020, he told me that his predecessor, Ms O'Keeffe, had not in the handover period provided a lot of detail concerning this contract.

Mr. Richard Collins

I did not say that. What I said was that I was aware of this contract and, I said, the commercial contract. I was asked to conclude the five-year contract. Regarding the commercial contract, I was aware that RTÉ was trying to broker an arrangement with a sponsor to boost Ryan Tubridy's earnings. I was aware of that, but I was never involved at any stage in those negotiations nor did I contribute to them.

If his predecessor, as chief financial officer, who knew some of the detail, spoke about this, would Mr. Collins not have asked some of the questions?

Mr. Richard Collins

One has to look back at what was going on in RTÉ. At that stage, Covid had just hit. I was brought in and took over as chief financial officer. In the first two months following Covid, we dropped €7 million in terms of income. We were heading towards running out of cash in the business. My absolute top priority was preserving the jobs of people in RTÉ and preserving RTÉ. I was totally focused on that. I was asked to lead a recovery or survival plan for RTÉ. I had to negotiate with banks on which we had covenants falling due, with the Government and I worked with the executive to renegotiate all of the contracts we had with suppliers. As a result, that was my clear focus. This commercial agreement was being handled by the director general, as I saw it. I concluded the straightforward part of it - the five-year deal - but I was comfortable that she, the most senior person in the business, was handling it. I had bigger issues to worry about at that stage. I was two months into the business.

Everyone remembers what was happening in Covid. We remember that people from RTÉ came before this committee and the Government gave significant wage supports to RTÉ. The difficulty we have is that we were misled at the time around some of the financial arrangements. The wage subsidies were about trying to protect employment. People were taking salary cuts and yet, arguably - I am not saying Mr. Collins did - some senior people within RTÉ clearly knew at the time that this was not happening.

Mr. Richard Collins

I am going back on my notes. I was at a meeting on 30 April, at which it was confirmed there would be no indemnity or guarantee given to Ryan Tubridy. That was the last I knew of it. It was news to me when I read the statement from the acting director general last week that a guarantee had been given seven days later on this Zoom meeting with the director general and solicitor present. I was not informed of any of that.

When did Ms Doherty become aware that Ryan Tubridy's salary was understated?

Ms Moya Doherty

I received a phone call from the deputy chair of the board and, following that, the chair of the board, in March 2023.

In March 2023. Nobody would have alerted Ms Doherty at any stage that there were questions about the figures that had been put into the public domain?

Ms Moya Doherty

Those figures were published, audited and presented to the Government and the public as savings of 15%.

Perhaps we may come back to the auditors question. I wish to ask, briefly, about Toy Show The Musical. Ms Doherty is one of the most experienced theatre producers and content creators in the country. Was Ms Doherty consulted around Toy Show The Musical at any stage?

Ms Moya Doherty

I was, absolutely. I met the two original creators a number of years back. They are very experienced and talented women. I support creativity. I believe that the terms of the Broadcasting Act 2009 permit RTÉ to develop and charge for ticketed events. Yes, I was aware there was a risk. There is a risk in all of these things, but there was enormous pressure for commercial to bring in additional income. There was an agreed strategy between the board and the executive that RTÉ was to develop a new business producing up to 50 live ticketed events by 2024.

Ms Ní Raghallaigh pre-empted my question. She will recall that I put it to her and Ms Anne O'Leary - I did not think it was fair to ask Robert Shortt - last week whether they had continued confidence in the executive. Our difficulty is the more drip-drip-drip, the more damage is being done to the reputation of RTÉ. Ms Ní Raghallaigh's role as chair and that of the new director general is to restore trust. There are certain actions that the Government can take. Will Ms Ní Raghallaigh tell us what other actions she believes must be taken on the part of the board and the new director general?

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

As I have said, we welcome the work the Minister set up in relation to the corporate governance and culture within the organisation. I believe that recommendations will come out of that. Kevin Bakhurst, Adrian Lynch and I have been discussing this. We have a meeting with the Minister tomorrow, when we will go into more detail.

We have already seen one director general step down. Does Ms Ní Raghallaigh expect that we will see others stepping down?

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

As I said in my statement, I ask the Senator to respect that I have obligations under the Broadcasting Act 2009.

Many people found humour in my accent last week. While I was asking who the RTÉ board was "loyal" to, the executive took me to be asking who they were "lying" to. While that was not what I asked or insinuated at the time, with the new information that has come to light since last week, when we were assured that there was only one barter account, rather than three, I now wonder. Were the executive fully truthful with us or was there a subconscious element in hearing the word "lying"? I ask that honestly. The drip feed of different information is insulting to us as public representatives, to taxpayers, licence-fee payers and, above all, to the ordinary, decent staff of RTÉ. It is just astonishing. Are we expected to believe that no one apart from Ms Forbes could have known about the figures published for Ryan Tubridy's pay? Is it the case that the executive board members, many of whom are here, were not informed? Did they fail in their fiduciary legal duty as board members? Each board member must ask themselves that question and must tell us. It is quite strict.

Who does Deputy McGrath wish to direct that question to?

I am asking any board member who feels like answering whether they failed in their fiduciary duty. I am on boards; I recall one night spending two hours at a voluntary board meeting, trying to reconcile a €20 underspend in a voluntary transport company. That is the level of accountability there should be.

Who does Deputy McGrath want to respond to that?

Any board member who feels like it.

Not the executive, the actual oversight board?

Okay. We will start with Ms Doherty.

Ms Moya Doherty

As I said earlier, a board has an oversight role. RTÉ is a unique and unusual-----

It is a fiduciary responsibility that the board has.

Ms Moya Doherty

Yes, absolutely.

Ms Moya Doherty

And we take it very seriously and did. As I said earlier, there are three ways a board garners information. The first is at regular board meetings, side meetings and ARC meetings, and from the managers, leaders and the executive of the organisation. The second is on publication of the accounts, when the auditors have trawled through every single figure. We trust and believe the auditors when they say it is okay to sign off on the accounts, and we do. The third possibility is walking along the corridors of RTÉ hoping that somebody will come to you to say there is a problem here or a problem there. Those problems were never raised.

A key legal and fiduciary responsibility of any board is negotiating the pay, terms and conditions of the company's highest earners. Only the board is in a position to do this job. Almost every board, but especially a publicly funded one, must have a remuneration committee. That committee most likely must meet several times per year. It must investigate and negotiate the pay levels. It is not as simple as waiting for somebody to bump into you in the corridor. I do not accept that. The company's executives report back to the board. However, how could the chair of RTÉ's pay and remuneration committee, Ms Doherty, fail to attend a single meeting of this key committee between 2018 and 2020? In fact, over a five year period, the chair of the board only attended two committee meetings. How could this have been tolerated by the rest of the board?

Ms Moya Doherty

The role of the remuneration committee was a consultancy role in relation to salaries. I was in regular consultation with the director general. The entire focus of the board, my colleagues, myself and those on the remuneration committee was that the targets of cuts were met.

Sure, they were not. The RTÉ executive board's remuneration committee has defined terms of reference, and it failed completely to comply with them. This is why we are sitting around here today. How can you explain this gigantic failure? You were asleep at the wheel. You did not do your job, full stop. How you can maintain your positions is astonishing. We now know that between 2017 and 2021, the RTÉ remuneration committee failed to hold the minimum number of meetings as required under its own corporate governance. You failed to honour your own corporate governance. There was no mention of this failure in notes or the organisation's annual report, which you refer to now. The minutes of the meetings that did take place were not even circulated to the executive board. You were asleep at the wheel. You might as well have stayed away. You, in a cavalier manner, allowed them to run amok. Why did the executive board not request the minutes of the remuneration committee? This is clearly a failure of RTÉ's executive board to perform its functions and role. Would you agree with that? I have also called for criminal investigation into the actions and conduct of the senior executives of RTÉ in clearing the outgoing DG while a crisis is deepening and there are revelations of secret payments worth hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of euro.

This is shocking. I am asking, would you as chair, the board members and the chief financial officer welcome a criminal inquiry? Would you have any objection to such an inquiry? I believe nothing other than the fraud squad will suffice. We could and will be here for meetings for weeks and weeks. The public is aghast, and you barefacedly just tell us what you feel like telling us, and misunderstand our accents and God knows what else. You take us for fools, with that slush fund out there. If the Minister gets the courage, and she must, to send in the fraud squad, will you co-operate and will you welcome it?

Deputy McGrath, is that question directed at somebody specifically?

There are plenty here to ask - the senior people in RTÉ on the executive board. Do not all look so stony-faced.

I might ask you-----

I want to know if you will co-operate with a Garda inquiry. Nothing else will uncover the facts.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

If fraud was committed, then of course-----

Mr. Adrian Lynch

If any fraud was committed, then of course we welcome an investigation, if that is your question.

If any fraud was committed. What about your failure in your fiduciary duties, to which you are duty bound as board members? Is there anybody to check that up, or have you any moral duty to say, "Sorry, I didn't attend those meetings I should have", "Sorry, there were not the number of requested meetings"? That is there in your own governance. How do you explain that? I think we should have a circular table here. They could all pass the paper around because we are getting no answers. No answers - round and round. Round the house and mind the dresser. Do you understand that old proverb in country parlance? I am empowered to represent the country people, the plain people of Ireland.

Deputy McGrath, you still have two and a half minutes. Are there any further questions you would like to ask?

Thank you, but sure I cannot get answers for the ones I asked. Could I ask again? Would all of the board members welcome a Garda inquiry? Will you explain why you failed in your fiduciary duties, as set down in your own corporate governance, to do the required minimum number of meetings and why the chair absurdly failed to attend those meetings and be in control of what was going on?

Ms Moya Doherty

With regard to fraud, Deputy, I take comfort in the legal guidance given to Ms Ní Raghallaigh, as chair of the board, and to the RTÉ board that there is no fraud involved. Lack of transparency, misguided and misleading -yes, but under the legal advice right now, I believe, and I will ask the chair to confirm this, that no fraud has been committed.

Would you welcome a Garda inquiry?

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

As-----

No, the previous speaker, please. Would you welcome a Garda inquiry and co-operate with it?

Ms Moya Doherty

I am sure that everybody will co-operate if a Garda inquiry is necessary. Right now, the legal advice says there is no fraud.

What else will we get? We are expected to hold you to account. Nobody in RTÉ is holding anybody to account except the junior staff on zero-hour contracts and the people who cannot get maternity leave and sick leave. This is outrageous. I am still calling and will be calling. What about yourselves? Ms Ní Raghallaigh was about to say something.

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

I was saying that the legal advice is as Ms Doherty has said. The opinion is that there is no fraud. Of course, if something-----

Sorry, but that is your legal advice.

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

Correct.

You could get ten different forms of legal advice from ten different people. It is not legal. We want public accountability. This committee and the Committee of Public Accounts wants to try to uncover as best we can, but we are wasting our time. We have lists of people who were appointed at one of the scoping-----

Deputy McGrath, I remind you, although I know you do not need reminding, that the Minister has already said she will put in place an external auditor and professional, and there are two reviews under way. Let us not make accusations at the moment. Let us have our deliberation and our discussion. I appreciate it is frustrating for both sides, but let us stay respectful in all this. Have you any final questions?

Sorry, I am being respectful. I am respectful of the public and the licence payer.

Have you any final questions?

I have a final question. The Minister has appointed one person but she has not appointed all of them. This is going round in circles. I am asking, as I did at our first private meeting, that we have a Garda investigation into this, because I knew what was going to go on. These people have come in, and more will come in next week and more will come in the future. This will go on and the next thing you know, tomorrow's scandal will blow it away. When you do RTÉ "Prime Time Investigates", and you do a good job on that in the main, you do not accept legal advice from a firm or somebody that everything is okay. You go in and forensically interrogate and put it out on RTÉ "Prime Time Investigates". The hat and the focus is on different people now, so you are falling far short in being upfront and with your legal advice. You cannot hide behind legal advice for fiduciary failures of executive board members. You just cannot. Ordinary and voluntary boards around the country, which many of us, and maybe many of you too, sit on, are expected to do things right, but RTÉ seems to have this idea that it can do as it likes. You were asleep at the wheel, you were incompetent, and you did not do your job.

We will conclude on that, Deputy McGrath, because you are way over time.

I sincerely thank the witnesses for appearing before the committee today. I am conscious it has been a gruelling time for them all. It has obviously been a gruelling time for everybody in RTÉ, in particular those who are modestly paid and on insecure contracts. I am conscious this whole experience is taking a toll on everybody, but we are here because we all want a stronger and better RTÉ at the end of this process.

My first question is for Mr. Lynch about that letter of guarantee in 2020 to Mr. Tubridy. Mr. Lynch has knowledge of that letter, and then seven months later there were pay cuts being proposed to the staff by the RTÉ executive. Did he not think then that he should have raised that issue, that there was a guarantee of no reduction for a five-year period to Mr. Tubridy, and yet staff were being asked to take pay cuts in the order of between 3% and 6%?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Yes, absolutely. I would totally accept that. As I said last week, all of these talent contracts, in the round, should come to the executive board so there is total transparency around them.

Is there a letter of guarantee of no pay cuts to anybody else that Mr. Lynch is aware of?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Not that I am aware of.

What is the update on Mr. Tubridy's contract at this point? We have heard he is out of written contract and that there is a verbal contract. Where are things at now?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

As the Senator will see, Mr. Tubridy's supplied contract was one for television and radio services. That contract expired at the end of May, once he had stepped back from "The Late Late Show". We are in the process-----

The written contract expired at the end of May.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Correct. We are in the process of renegotiating a new contract for radio. Those negotiations have been suspended for the moment.

But a verbal contract is a contract nonetheless, is it not, particularly when a person has been with an organisation for a period of time? I am not a lawyer but this is what I am given to understand.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Correct

So Mr. Tubridy is in contract at the moment?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Correct.

And nothing has been done to change that over the past week.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Correct.

I thank the witnesses for furnishing the information on the allowances. With regard to the pay of the top 100, I find the column detailing the allowances particularly interesting. We see that, in the main, there are allowances in the order of €24,000 to €42,000, the latter being the allowance for one individual. What are those allowances about? I see that one manager has no allowances at all. Is every allowance paid directly by RTÉ? Are some payments part of a commercial deal? How are they managed and what are they for?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

The only allowance I am aware of is the car allowance I receive. There is no commercial partnership deal or otherwise in respect of any of those; they are paid by RTÉ.

So there is no sponsorship element to any of those allowances?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Absolutely not; this is all staff.

Is the allowance of €42,000 for a car?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I am not sure; I will have to look into it.

We need to see the breakdown of allowances because the arrangements contrast with the ongoing process involving travel and subsistence rates for the majority of staff, who are just trying to get the Civil Service rates. The figures are akin to what some people are actually earning in RTÉ at this point.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Without going against the advice of the data protection officer on releasing people's names and so on, we can supply the details on any of the allowances on which the Senator wishes to furnish me with questions.

I thank Mr. Lynch.

I want to ask Ms O'Leary about client hospitality. In any of the trips or outings, were members of the board, the chair or presenters wheeled out to meet sponsors? I assume that is part and parcel of what is needed to keep sponsors sweet.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

No, not on any trips. There was a question last week about whether the former head of news and current affairs who was at the Champions League match had come through barter or commercial. The answer is "No". He went personally. If we are going on a trip, it is always a matter of either a client or an agency. For example, when we were at a match in Edinburgh, we may have met up with the commentary team, who were already there, but we would not pay for them. We would not bring them.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I want to qualify that because I have been through the barter list in detail over the weekend. The only events I would have attended, for example, are events where the commercial division would be hosting a breakfast for media agencies that buy airtime from us. As director of channels, I would have been explaining the upcoming schedules and so on that they would buy airtime around. That is the only event I was involved in.

Would members of the board ever be asked to attend an event with a commercial sponsor?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

Not that I can-----

Would there be an ask of a top presenter whose programme is effectively sponsored? Other than at the Renault events with Mr. Tubridy-----

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

No, the rules are normally quite strict.

-----the presenters would not be asked to turn up.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

As I have said before, the only time I have been across a top talent contract has been in the case in question. There would be strict rules. There would be a photocall normally, but not if the individuals were from news and current affairs. A new sponsor would come in to RTÉ and there might be one photocall with the client and the presenter. That would be it. There would be no other obligations, including in respect of any sponsorship deals we do.

I want to understand a little more about the relationship between presenters and sponsors. I take what Ms O'Leary said in that regard. First, I want to ask about her working relationship with Noel Kelly. It was said last week that advice was offered on dealing with sponsors. Could Ms O'Leary elaborate more on her working relationship and how frequently she would have contact with Noel Kelly?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

From a commercial perspective, the most intense period of interaction with Noel Kelly would have been when the director general was asking me to find a solution for the payments, which led to the barter account. Normally, I would have very occasional contact with Noel Kelly. I might meet him in RTÉ. He also has a business, CMS Marketing, which represents clients, including Bank of Ireland and Vodafone. Every now and again, if there was an issue with something, he might call me or An Post, but rarely.

I have a question that is perhaps for Mr. Lynch but also for Mr. Collins and Ms O'Keeffe. I am very thankful that Ms O'Keeffe is here, particularly as she is a former employee. On the impact of sponsorship deals on the negotiation of a contractor fee, I have a question on the determination of the overall fee negotiation. The presenter is not always aligned with the sponsorship of a programme. If there is new sponsorship, are fees renegotiated? I am asking this question because we have heard time and again that losing Ryan Tubridy would not just be about saving the €500,000 or thereabouts that he was earning but also about losing the millions of euro in commercial revenue that he was bringing in. To what extent does this colour the fees of Mr. Tubridy or any of the presenters whose programmes have a commercial sponsorship deal?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

That is the only one I am aware of. I would be aware, from an editorial conflict point of view, of other talent, some of whom represent themselves and some of whom are represented by Noel Kelly. It is a question of the editorial conflict, so we would not be involved in the negotiation, be it with an insurance company, sports brand or whatever. That would not impact the fee.

Has there been any tidying up of policy? We have the editorial guidelines but has there been any new guidance for staff working within RTÉ regarding their relationships with sponsors over recent months? Is there a policy with regard to the use of the corporate box on match days in Croke Park or the Aviva Stadium. It would be important to know that.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I do not think we have a corporate box-----

I am referring to availing of corporate entertainment.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

-----with a sponsor or something like that.

I also want to ask about the trip to Japan. It is important that we get an itinerary for the trip because I believe there is some speculation that there was a stopover on the way back. We need clarification on that.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

Would the Deputy like me to answer?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

It was a trip with my colleague, my head of sales, and four clients. We flew to Japan via Dubai and came back via Dubai. There was no stopover. The companies represented on the trip had spent €38 million across RTÉ the previous year. If I can do anything today, I would really like to put this in the context of the business we are generating for these people.

I thank Ms O'Leary.

I have two final questions. On Toy Show the Musical, I get that risk is part and parcel of any arts programming. Certainly, the show did not work out as intended. I believe the revenue was 15% of what RTÉ had forecast in quarter 2 last year. Mr. Coveney referred to the project as being multi-annual. What were his expectations for years two and three of the project? Is the show still incurring costs? Are there contractual arrangements relating to it that RTÉ is still tied into?

Mr. Rory Coveney

The answer to the second question is "No". The only residual cost is that of the storage of the set, which is €8,000 per year until we decide what we are doing with it.

What was the first question?

What did Mr. Coveney forecast for years two and three? From the text, RTÉ is kind of acknowledging that it could have made a loss, even though it was not forecasting one, but it was obviously expecting to make a gain in year two or year three.

Mr. Rory Coveney

The big difference in subsequent years is that you do not have the development costs, which are obviously considerable. The profit margin should go up in subsequent years, assuming the revenue stays the same because the development costs are sunk in the first year.

As it turned out, that did not happen. At the moment, we are considering what we will do. We have not made any decision. We are not doing it this year but we are considering what we might do in the future.

I thank Mr. Coveney. I have a final question for Mr. Shortt. The external review was announced yesterday. It will be approximately eight months by the time we see something concrete from that process. What does he believe needs to happen in the interim within RTÉ? First, within the board, because he is on the board, what changes need to happen to try to reinstill confidence of both the staff and the public in RTÉ?

Mr. Robert Shortt

There were a number of things that the board committed to doing in our original statement, which seems like a long time ago now. Obviously, one of those was to bring any future amendments or new presenting contracts under the remit of the remuneration committee. That is an important step to take. We have a lot of reflection to do, just on how we work on the board, and how we approach issues and ask questions. We will take that very seriously. There are many reviews going on and that will be important work as well. As part of my membership of the audit and risk committee, we hop the current Grant Thornton review will finish its work as soon as possible and we intend to release as much information as we can from that. There is an awful lot of immediate work to do and then there are those other things about questioning ourselves about how we can work better.

To answer the first part of the Senator's question in terms of the review, it does seem like eight months is a long time, but I know there are so many issues that this whole disaster has brought up, particularly for staff. The word "culture" is bandied about a lot and it is something that I never really understood until this all happened. It is actually fundamental to repairing RTÉ and its reputation. I know from speaking to colleagues that they do intend to make a real contribution to that review. They welcome the fact that part of the review is not just about corporate governance; it is about how staff have been treated and how they have perceived their treatment over the years. Various issues have come up time and time again. They are looking forward to contributing to that process and they really welcome it.

I thank Mr. Shortt.

I am mindful I said we would give everybody a moment's break. There are 14 colleagues on this committee and I am only on colleague number five, so I propose when we get to colleague number seven, to make sure we have heard from at least half of the committee, we will then take a break. Is that okay with witnesses? Are they happy to continue? It will hopefully only take another ten or 15 minutes. We will then come back and proceed to the next piece. On that basis, I call Senator Warfield.

I understand that an oversight mechanism was meant to be in place between the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media and RTÉ. It was raised in the Dáil earlier that there was meant to be monthly meetings between the Department with responsibility for media, the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery, and Reform and RTÉ relating to finance and accounts. Was that structure in place?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I can perhaps answer that. During my tenure, that was in place. I do not recall when it started but we met, I could not swear it was monthly, but quite regularly with the Department and the officials to talk about a number of matters.

I appreciate that.

Mr. Richard Collins

Just to update on that, that has continued. There are meetings roughly every six weeks to two months and between RTÉ and the Department. New Economy and Recovery Authority, NewERA, generally attends as well.

In her opening statement, Ms Ní Raghallaigh said she is deeply unhappy about the evident pattern of inconsistency and lack of completeness in the provision of information to date by the executive. Before her time, RTÉ appeared before the Committee of Public Accounts on five occasions and when it came to bogus self-employment, it seemed to mislead the committee. It is time for our public sector broadcaster to hold its hands up and to say that the time of bogus self-employment is over. I wonder how the people who are on these contracts feel when they see other special deals happening. I raised this the other day. How many workers are involved in the Department of Social Protection's investigation, which is significant, into RTÉ? How many examinations have concluded?

I have a question for the CFO. How much contingent liability has RTÉ provided for in terms of money that might be owed to Revenue?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I can provide the detail on the number of investigations and where they are, which I have brought it with me, before I hand over to the CFO regarding the provision. Just for clarity, the Department of Social Protection is currently carrying out an investigation in respect of the status of RTÉ staff for PRSI insurability. The Department has indicated that it intends to investigate more than 500 individuals who have provided or provide services to RTÉ on a contractor basis. This process began in October 2020 and is likely to continue beyond 2023. A summary of investigations to date is: total in progress or completed, 134; decisions received, 112; class A PRSI, 77; class S PRSI, 35; outstanding or awaiting decisions, 22; closed and PRSI paid, 38. A summary of appeals is: appeals lodged, 44; appeals withdrawn, 12; appeals active, 31; appeals closed, one; appeals heard, five; appeals upheld, one; appeals unsuccessful, two; appeals, outcome unknown, two; and High Court appeal, one. RTÉ is only appealing decisions where there are factual inaccuracies and-or where there are issues of legal interpretation. We are very happy to furnish the committee with that information.

In terms of the contingent liability that RTÉ may have for those 500 workers, approximately 60% of the examinations by the State had resulted in decisions as of last year. What kind of contingent liability does RTÉ have in place for money that might be owed to Revenue?

Mr. Richard Collins

We have a provision in place and it is sizeable. The provision is based on the knowledge we have on how these decisions have gone so far. The provision was one of the main areas of the most recent audit with Deloitte. It has been through it thoroughly and a lot of time was spent on its adequacy.

Does Mr. Collins have a ballpark figure?

Mr. Richard Collins

I think that is commercially sensitive. I would consider that commercially sensitive.

Yes, it is just-----

Sorry, can I just go back over that, Mr. Collins? I am really hesitant to accept the line of anything being commercially sensitive at this point in time. Will he repeat why it is commercially sensitive?

Mr. Richard Collins

I think normally companies do not reveal what provisions they have in their accounts. This expenditure has not been incurred yet. This is what, based on our assumptions and the view we have taken on things, might actually happen but this has not occurred yet. It is one thing if we had settled a certain amount. I am happy to give those figures but this has not happened yet. This is something that will happen, potentially, over the next five years.

If it was €10 million, €20 million or €30 million, it is something that could bankrupt the organisation.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Yes. I will just explain in terms of the legal advice around this. We cannot prejudice any kind of outcomes but the process is ongoing. We are fully co-operating fully with the scope section. There are 500 individuals and we are very happy to supply information and updates to the committee on a regular basis.

I have a question for Ms O'Keeffe. In terms of credit, section 1.12(b) of the Grant Thornton report states: "RTÉ raised a credit in July 2020 of €75,000 with the Commercial Brand [and we know that to be Renault] on their airtime spend so in effect RTÉ funded the €75,000 payment to Talent [whom we know to be Mr. Tubridy]." As I understand it, that is a voucher for revenue for advertisements that Renault could use at a later date.

The document published by RTÉ on 22 June shows Mr. Tubridy's published earnings versus his actual earnings. I would like to query the figures for 2020.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I am sorry. I was not in RTÉ in July 2020. I do not have access to the Grant Thornton report and I was not responsible for the earnings. I wanted to clarify that for disclosure.

I appreciate that. Perhaps someone else might be able to give me clarity on the year 2020. The figure Renault gave to Mr. Tubridy for the other years is €75,000, but the figure listed for 2020 is €56,000. Did Renault get a full credit of €75,000 in 2020, as it did in 2021 and 2022.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

I can help to clarify that. Renault was only involved in 2020. That was the year in which it got the credit note against its sponsorship fee. It was coming to the end of year 2 of a three-year sponsorship contract for "The Late Late Show". It had already paid in full for year 2. I asked for the credit note to be raised internally through my commercial manager and notified the CFO. It was against the sponsorship income and was raised in July 2020.

Why was it lower in 2020?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

The credit note was definitely raised for €75,000.

Mr. Richard Collins

Is the Senator asking about the €56,000?

Yes, it is different from the other amounts.

Mr. Richard Collins

It is due to the phasing of a year. His contract ran from April to March, so nine months of the fee was recorded in that year.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

As regards the three payments and what the Senator is asking, in a way, this is all about payments being made directly to Ryan Tubridy and why they were not declared as part of his earnings. At the exact point in time when a credit note was provided to Renault, RTÉ was paying Ryan Tubridy and that should have been declared. When RTÉ paid Ryan Tubridy from the barter account on two occasions, that should have been declared. When we drill down into all of this, they are the three issues with respect to the published figures. The moment the credit note was issued, RTÉ was paying Ryan Tubridy and not declaring it. The moment we paid from the barter account, RTÉ paid Ryan Tubridy and did not declare it.

Last week, I called for the publication of the salaries of the top earners across the organisation, not only of presenters. I welcome its publication. Would RTÉ consider publishing the anonymised salaries of the bottom 50 earners across the organisation, in order for people to understand the pay differential and culture in the organisation?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Yes, we will.

I welcome the witnesses and I thank Ms O'Keeffe for a comprehensive statement. It was helpful. If we had that level of candour last week, we could have saved a lot of time. I also recognise that Ms O'Leary has been truthful and up-front on the difficult position she holds. She is addressing commercial issues that would not normally be addressed in an open format. It is a little like not wanting to know how the sausages are made. They might taste good, but sometimes the ingredients are difficult to handle. I thank her for that. She did so last week as well. She was direct. She was not evasive and we owe her a debt of gratitude for that.

Mr. Lynch stated that he spoke to the director of content this morning. Please pass on our good wishes. Will he share with the committee anything he might have shared with Mr. Lynch?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

He said two things to me on the phone. First, the reason he is not here - he wrote a note to his staff to explain - is that he has been significantly unwell and that continues to be the case. Once he is better and in a condition to be able to come before the House, he will do so. Second, as director of content, he has an editorial role. He wanted that to be emphasised. That was all, but in time we will have a full account.

What does Mr. Lynch understand he has an editorial role to mean?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

His role is editorial. It is to do with editorial decision-making. For example, if guest X is going on "The Late Late Show", for example, if Ryan Tubridy is going to interview the Taoiseach, what questions are going to be asked, etc. That is his primary role.

Yet, in Ms O'Keeffe she spoke at length about him being involved with Mr. Kelly as regards putting a deal together. In addition to his editorial role, he clearly has a commercial role. Is that Mr. Lynch's understanding?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

As it has been clarified to me-----

No, not as clarified to Mr. Lynch. Mr. Lynch knows what his role is.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I do. He has an editorial role.

Does he also have a role in negotiations?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Fee level.

For completeness, all the witnesses are answering questions as best they can. Are they aware of anything that would have a material impact on the work of this committee that has not yet been divulged to us? Are they aware of any chestnut about which they hope the question will not be asked?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

No.

Is Mr. Collins in particular aware of anything?

Mr. Richard Collins

No.

I turn to the tripartite agreement that was furnished to the committee by RTÉ last night. It is interesting because it details an arrangement between RTÉ, Mr. Tubridy and Renault for the period from October 2020 to 31 December 2021. It is signed by either Nicola or Niamh McCormack on behalf of Ryan Tubridy and is dated 21 April 2023. How in the name of God could that be the case? It was signed on 15 April 2021 by Renault and it was not signed by RTÉ at all. Can the witnesses shed some light on that?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

The first time I saw this contract was when I did a review of the file and it came out. The one thing about the contract that struck me immediately was that it did not contain a guarantee to underwrite the €75,000-----

I will get to that in a second. Will Mr. Lynch stick to the question?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

-----or the €75,000. The first time I saw it was last week.

No, I am asking how it happened that someone signed it on behalf of Mr. Tubridy on 21 April 2023 - this year - when it relates to a period between October 2020 and December 2021.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I can shed no light on that.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

I probably can.

Do we know who signed it on behalf of RTÉ?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

I should have signed it on behalf of RTÉ. I was across all the discussions around it. The question of why the €75,000 is not stated explicitly is that the credit note had already been raised at that stage. To be fair to Renault, it said that before it made the payment to Noel Kelly, it wanted to be sure it had in writing what it was going to get. We had numerous meetings, mainly over Teams, about this. The dates are also quite confusing because everything ran on. However, I was across that contract and should have signed it.

I suppose in truth it is not a contract. I am not a lawyer, but it is always said of a contract there must be three Ps, namely, parties, property and a price. We know who the parties are and what the property is, but we do not have a price. I am surprised when we consider that solicitors were across this, that was not raised. It does not seem to have been. Are there any other side letters relating to that document that we have not seen?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

No.

Okay, other than those that are there.

On the top 100 employees, my understanding is that people in RTÉ have been asked whether they are prepared to have their names released. Some have said it is not a problem. Others have raised issues. If RTÉ is finding difficulties, will it release the names of the people who are prepared to have their salaries notified and a list of those who have chosen not to? It would not have to release the figures relating to the people, just a list of people who have said they are okay with having their figures released and a list who do not want theirs released.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I will talk to the data protection officer, DPO, and come back to the Senator.

On data protection and item 10, the detail of benefit, accruing including goods and services, by RTÉ personnel from commercial partners.

I want to explore the issue of brand ambassadors. Surely no brand ambassador is suggesting that his or her name should not be made public considering that is his or her arrangement with a commercial brand. They are in a brand ambassador position because they are linking their names with a product. Can Mr. Lynch clarify that? Is any brand ambassador with a car from Renault in receipt of a car allowance from RTÉ?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

The first question was about GDPR while the second concerned brand ambassadors. In response to the first question, we obviously need to go through a process with the DPO and respect the rights of individuals but we are going through that process so let us see where that takes us. I am aware of one instance where somebody had the loan of a car. My understanding is that this car has been returned. That individual is a staff member of RTÉ so-----

How long would the car have been on loan for?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I believe it was for a period of five years.

Okay - thanks for that.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

That was not approved.

Is any individual receiving a car allowance as part of his or her allowances while also being in receipt of a car or a brand ambassador?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I will have to verify that but-----

I am trying to understand the mileage and other elements. Is it possible that somebody could be in receipt of a car allowance and not even hold a driver's licence?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Again, I will verify that.

And obviously as that relates to mileage and any other elements of that. I am probably no different from anyone else in this space. We have received calls and emails from people making all sorts of allegations so I will throw out some of it and if people want to respond, it is better than having it on social media. Prior to joining RTÉ, Mr. Lynch ran a production company.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I did.

He had some successful endeavours there and then he sold the company, parted ways from it or whatever.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Correct.

Has Mr. Lynch retained any format rights to any of the programmes he would have been part of before?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

It is a good question. That was part of my original contract with RTÉ - that I could retain format rights. Having joined RTÉ and given my position and the fact that it would involve commissioning programming, I gave all those format rights away for free.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

One particular one was "Ireland's Fittest Family". I gave it to the other rights holders for free.

I am conscious that Ms Anne O'Leary has been with us through all of our deliberations and has not yet joined the conversation but we will certainly invite her in. We will give our witnesses and my colleagues a break if that is okay.

Could I ask one last question?

Does Mr. Lynch know when the car that was on loan for five years was returned?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Yesterday.

We will suspend the meeting for five minutes.

Sitting suspended at 3.33 p.m. and resumed at 3.40 p.m.

I thank everyone for joining us again this week. I know how difficult this has been for everyone on a personal level. RTÉ's mission statement describes an ambition to achieve what is described as "one RTÉ", one collaborative team working in the same direction to serve the needs of the public in regard to public service broadcasting. There is not one RTÉ. There are two RTÉs. That, for me, is one of the most stark outcomes from all of our engagement this week and last week and indeed the witnesses' engagement with the Committee of Public Accounts. There is an RTÉ where people are paid exceptionally generous salaries, where people are given guarantees that, irrespective of the economic trials and tribulations of RTÉ and indeed of the nation, their pay is not going to be cut. There is an RTÉ, and there may perhaps be a commercial reality behind it, where members of staff attend concerts, go to golf outings and travel around the world to rugby matches. Then there is the RTÉ of the people trying to keep the show on the road in regard to the public service broadcasting remit. These are the researchers, reporters and technicians, all of whom were required to take significant pay cuts and were devoid of the resources necessary, I would argue, to do their jobs well. The good ship RTÉ seems to have a set of people on the bridge living a reasonably lavish lifestyle and then the galley slaves down below, pulling the oars, trying to keep the show on the road in terms of honouring RTÉ's remit to the public and to its licence payers.

I would like to ask, initially, of Ms Doherty or Ms Ní Raghallaigh where is the priority? They seem to be undermining and cutting resources to the very people who are charged with delivering on RTÉ's remit, namely, those journalists, technicians, staff and researchers, yet at the same time, there seems to be no attempt made to cut back on the significant expenses around the commercial wing of the organisation. Who is serving who? Ultimately, where does the priority lie in regard to being able to allocate resources? Has the pendulum swung too much in the direction of the commercial life of RTÉ to the detriment of its public service broadcasting remit?

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

As I said in the opening statement, I believe there is that conflict. It is what we have to address. When there is a dual-funded model for the public service broadcaster, this is, unfortunately, what happens. That is the big question. What do we want in our public service media? What way do we want it to be funded? I am looking at all the areas around that. The dual-funded model is what is mandated for us to work with. We have to work with it. Obviously, this is a result of trying to operate within that model while at the same time working within a funding structure where advertising revenue is plateauing, to put it mildly, and will start to go downwards. In fact, it has already. Finding other sources of income to keep that level of commercial income within the organisation is challenging. On the other side of that there is a licence fee structure that is not recognising the basis for the licence fee and how it should be charged. We have to have a grown-up conversation about that now. We are coming to a moment in time where we have to have that conversation.

I thank Ms Ní Raghallaigh.

Ms Moya Doherty

I concur entirely with what the chair has said. We have had an ongoing debate about the future of public service media. We need to have a focused debate about what type of public service the country wants. Clearly, the balance of power shifted to the commercial side. That gives power to those who bring in big commercial revenue and audiences. That must change. The system is broken. The governance is broken and in some ways that makes for broken people making broken decisions.

Earlier on a question was asked of Mr. Lynch whether he intended to establish a register of external interests for employees and contractors within RTÉ. Looking at Tim Davie, when he was first appointed in his role as director general of the BBC in September 2020, within a couple of months such a register was established for the very same reasons I believe RTÉ should establish one. I may have been mistaken but I believed Mr. Lynch expressed some degree of reticence about having the register in place for contractors to RTÉ, namely, the biggest talent names.

Was that the case or did I misunderstand Mr. Lynch?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I have been talking to the incoming DG, Kevin Bakhurst, about this and we are keen to establish a register of interest to cover anybody who is on air. Obviously, there are some considerations with the DPO, but our objective is total transparency.

If you have someone who is a senior, significant journalist broadcaster within RTÉ, and on a Saturday night he is doing a gig for a bank and on Monday morning he is chairing a conversation about banking policy, it is absolutely crucial that the members of the public know that that individual has a commercial relationship with a bank external to RTÉ and his judgment on these matters might be somewhat flawed, shall we say, or influenced by that relationship. It is absolutely of importance to have that transparency. If it can be done at the BBC, I cannot understand why it could not be done at RTÉ.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I wish to add to the Deputy's example using current affairs that there is an absolutely rigorous process in place there, which is the mandatory obligation to declare any interest to ensure that we hold our independence and impartiality-----

But right now the public is not aware of those declarations.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Correct. However, that is something we need to undertake both in terms of communicating to the public and so on but it is also important to communicate the fact that while we have a certain event that has occurred, there are processes in RTÉ that are effective with regard to ensuring that the editorial relationship between RTÉ and the public is as good as it should be.

Perhaps I am mistaken in my recollection but I thought I heard Mr. Collins say last week that the barter account or accounts were not under the control of the CFO. That was his understanding.

Mr. Richard Collins

Yes.

Yet, Ms O'Keeffe seemed to indicate that in her time, before the arrival of Mr. Collins, she was very much aware of the barter accounts and they were very much accounted for within her financial scrutiny of the organisation on a yearly basis.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

My recollection, as part of my statement, is that barter traded income, which was relatively minor in the overall scheme from air time, was accounted for. We had a member of finance - a commercial revenue finance manager - who did many things, but one of the things that he did was book the air time and the related costs associated with that. That is my recollection.

Mr. Richard Collins

On joining, no, that was not the case. It sat outside the accounts and I brought them onto the accounts as part of the 2019 year-end – that stage. Finance-----

You can understand the public's difficulty if an outgoing CFO said they very much were within the remit of her and her-----

Mr. Richard Collins

I cannot comment on what happened on years before that. All I can comment is what I know. The control of the barter account stayed in commercial. Finance's role, at the end of the day, was a bookkeeping role to bring it onto the accounts at the end of year. That is how it has continued the past couple of years. The main thing here is that the barter account has been brought onto the balance sheet and it is visible. As a result of that, the auditors were able to pick up the issues that happened, and we are here today as a result of that.

Have any of the barter accounts been used for personal staff remuneration?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

Outside the current issue under discussion? No.

I refer to timelines. On 7 March, Deloitte contacted CFO, Richard Collins, about an issue on 7 March; on 8 March, the former DG, Dee Forbes, was informed there is an issue; on 17 March, the commercial director, Geraldine O'Leary, was contacted by Deloitte; on 21 March, Deloitte met the audit and risk committee, ARC; and sometime in April, Grant Thornton began its assessment or scrutiny.

Ms Anne O'Leary

Sorry, the Deputy is mixing up his O'Learys. Deloitte contacted me on 17 March and I am the chair of the audit and risk committee. As-----

My apologies. While all of this is ongoing and there was knowledge across the organisation of a serious discrepancy from an accounting perspective, the board went ahead with its recruitment and appointment of Kevin Bakhurst as the incoming DG. It announced it on 18 April, despite a serious audit issue hanging over the outgoing DG, Dee Forbes, and RTÉ's highest-paid presenter just happened to announce he was leaving a five-year contract on 16 March.

Did it not make sense at the time to pause the appointment of Kevin Bakhurst and continue to apply the necessary scrutiny to something you were all aware of at the time, resolve that and bring clarity to that before you went ahead and appointed him? Having the person that you all seem to apportion blame to kind of walking off the pitch in the middle of the crisis seems strange from a management perspective. Why did that occur?

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

The appointment of the incoming director general was the business of the board. At that time, we did not know the details. We knew that there was an issue with two payments and the Grant Thornton fact-finding exercise had started. I did not know until last week about the 7 March notification date. We did not have the details that you have the benefit of having now to be able to say. We had no hindsight. We did not know the detail.

Can Ms Anne O’Leary recall when exactly Grant Thornton began that audit in April?

Ms Anne O'Leary

Keep in mind the last committee meeting - I do not have details in front of me here - but I contacted them straight away. We then had to do terms of reference-----

(Interruptions).

Ms Anne O'Leary

It was in early April that they started work and it took them a number of months because they had to get the forensic team in to take a look at email exchanges and the accounts.

Can the committee see those terms of reference? Can they be made available to us?

Ms Anne O'Leary

Of course, 100%.

RTÉ, the entity, issued a statement last week that long-term agreements, LTAs, are not in breach of competition law. Did the witnesses seek legal advice on this before they made that statement and can we see it if they did?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

No, we did not. We sought internal legal advice, not external legal advice.

Those rebates, I understand, are passed on based on the volume of spend a particular advertiser might have with RTÉ. Have rebates been made to the Government or any State agencies as a result of the very significant spend we would have accrued, particularly during the pandemic?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

I will have to come back and confirm that. The way it actually works is at an agency level. One of the media agencies-----

They are funnelled through the agencies.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

Yes. One would represent about 50 or 60 clients maybe and they are funnelled through an agency. I would have to check whether or not it went from the agency to its client.

It is not a concern of yours, to be honest. That is the way you see it. You make the rebate available to the agency and from then on, it is the agency's responsibility.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

Yes. Our trading arrangements are with the agencies across a portfolio of clients, in the main.

Finally, I refer to Soho House, which is an interesting expenditure item on the list of many expenditure items. It is an exclusive private members’ club in London. I have no issue, and I am sure the licence payers of Galway East have no issue, with a credible return on investment. One can argue that every investment Ms O’Leary made in terms of attracting and retaining advertisers was perfectly legitimate if there was credible and perhaps accountable return on that investment. This one seems to be straying into the territory of finding it difficult to prove that. Who was responsible for purchasing the membership? How often was it used? Who was brought there? What deals were done there? Does RTÉ still avail of Soho House? What was the purpose of it?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

Let me explain that. The membership is in my name and it is done on an annual basis. Unfortunately, I joined, or the membership came to me, just before Covid. The reason for the membership is, depending on the year, approximately 5% of our business comes from the UK. Previously, we had offices in London in Millbank, and previously on Bond Street, where we would meet clients.

We do not have that location anymore so we avail of the opportunity to have meetings in Soho House in London when we are there with clients.

Is it RTÉ's intention to retain that membership on an ongoing basis?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

As I have said, I-----

I understand, Ms O’Leary does not know. Can I ask perhaps Mr. Lynch or Mr. Collins if it is RTÉ’s intention to retain that membership and does it see value in retaining that membership? One can have meetings in a hotel boardroom without having to retain an ongoing annual membership of one of the most exclusive clubs in London city.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

That would be a question for the incoming commercial director with regard to the level of income we generate there. It is an exclusive club and it is also in a convenient location. There is a certain expectation in dealing with UK companies. I believe that approximately 40% of media spend into the Irish market comes out of the UK and is bought from there.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

I just wish to clarify and say something different. Some 5% of our revenue comes through UK agencies but if one looks at the multinational clients based in the UK, well over one third of our revenue is decided upon in the UK. It is appropriate that we have somewhere where we can have private negotiations with clients, which is what we do.

I thank the Deputy and our witnesses very much.

Can I ask for clarification on that? Witnesses were saying that this was just before the Covid-19 pandemic period but it is written down here that €2,115 was noted on 30 September 2020, which was roughly around when the second wave of the virus was hitting us. RTÉ reinstated the arrangement then, at the start of the second Covid wave.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

The point is that we joined but with Covid-19, we did not know when this lockdown was happening so when-----

But RTÉ reinstated it in September.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

It is an annual membership, yes.

Am I my right in saying that November 2019 was the first time the membership was taken out?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

I would have to check that out for the Deputy but it is an annual membership.

Would Ms O’Leary not have thought that with all of the uncertainty, that that was a great deal of money to spend on something that one might not even have had the chance to use?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

We also might have been able to use it. We need to travel to London to meet our customers. We could not predict when the next lockdown was going to be.

Was accommodation involved in that particular arrangement or was it just meeting rooms?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

It was just meeting rooms.

No accommodation was ever involved then.

I call on Deputy Fitzpatrick now to speak and he has ten minutes.

I want to first welcome all of our witnesses here today. What a mess. This matter is the topic of every conversation. All I am hoping is that over the next few weeks it will be put to bed but that will not happen unless we all put our hands up and start telling the truth because week-in and week-out more information is coming out where everybody is being blamed. It is about time we all put our hands up to state that RTÉ has 1,800 employees there at the moment and we must also consider them. What makes me very angry is that these are the workers who helped RTÉ get to where it is today. Over the past number of years RTÉ has been looking for additional crews and resources to help the organisation but all of these lies and backhanders have really left a bad taste.

Can I ask each and every one of our witnesses if they are fully aware that RTÉ publicly humiliated people years ago and sometimes even sent people to jail for not paying their RTÉ licence? Look at the position now where we have all of these white collar people sitting up here at the moment? How do they feel? Years ago, there was a big knock on the door, a person would come in and take the mother and father away and would put them in jail. Look at the position at the moment where hundreds, and probably thousands and millions of euros have gone missing, and everybody is getting off scot-free.

All we really want to know is where the money is going. Talking to the public out there, they are saying to me that we have a commercial director who does not actually direct any commercial dealings and we have a chief financial officer who does not monitor finances. As I said to our witnesses last week, if that was my own business, I would be out on the street and gone, finito. This makes no sense whatsoever.

Do our witnesses actually think that people out there are stupid? How could RTÉ hide this money? This was going to come out at some stage. This involved Ryan Tubridy, who was probably the best RTÉ personality over the past ten to 15 years and it was going to come out. Do our witnesses honestly think that people are foolish and would say that this might not happen? RTÉ has fraudulent invoices, off-balance-sheet accountancy and secret payments. There is something seriously wrong out there. I want to ask the witnesses present here today to please stop hiding behind their legal privileges, to stand up, be accountable, face the music, march on and be wiser.

I said here last week that I felt as though Dee Forbes was being pushed under a bus and I feel that even more today. A poll was done last weekend and the public was asked who was to blame in this. At the moment the public is blaming the witnesses here, the executive and the board. Some 73% of them are saying the board of management is to blame and only 11% to 12% blame Dee Forbes.

I know that there is a letter there at the moment which was submitted by Dee Forbes which seems to be pointing the finger at Ryan Tubridy.

I have a number of questions to ask the witnesses. Did anybody know about the understatement of these three payments years ago?

I appreciate that this is Ms O’Keefe’s first day to attend the committee. She was the chief financial officer, CFO, from 2012 to 2020. In fact, she was second-in-command to Dee Forbes. Her evidence to the committee will be very important today and her honesty will be very crucial. My first question to her is: Did the crazy salaries predate Dee Forbes?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

If the Deputy’s question is did those fees raised for contractors exist before Dee Forbes, they did. I just want to say, and I know that they are high, but together with the previous director-general, we made a commitment to the Government and to the public that we would reduce those top talent earnings from 2008. We did that through negotiation and editorial changes, etc. We reduced the top talent fees - I cannot recall the exact years - but between 2008 and perhaps 2016 - correct me if I am wrong on those dates - we reduced those earnings by over 30%. To answer the Deputy’s question then, those earnings were higher previously and we brought them down. We continued through this negotiation process which had started - Ryan Tubridy’s salary was part of it - with other presenters, where we wanted to reduce that further. The endeavour and aim were to reduce top talent fees further.

But Ryan Tubridy's salary went up to over €500,000 again. It has been said that Ms O’Keeffe played a central role in the Ryan Tubridy contract, and she admitted this earlier on where she was involved in the negotiations straight away. Did that include the guaranteed €75,000 in commercial income and can Ms O’Keeffe elaborate on her involvement in that?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

Deputy, I think my statement is quite comprehensive in that regard where it states that I was aware of the commercial arrangement but it was before any guarantees, rebates or commitments were made. It is quite clear in the statement that I was not involved in the guarantee.

Ms O’Keeffe is stating that she knew nothing about the guarantees for Ryan Tubridy.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

As per my statement, I was aware that the agent was looking for a guarantee at the time when I left the organisation but the organisation did not want to give that guarantee at that point in time. After that, I do not know what happened as I had left the organisation.

I promise I am not trying to put words in Ms O’Keefe’s mouth but I will ask the question again. Was Ms O’Keeffe aware of the €75,000 for Ryan Tubridy?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I am not sure-----

It does not matter which one. Was she aware of the sum of money?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I was aware of the potential rebate of €75,000 to Renault because RTÉ needed the first year of the deal to be cost neutral. I was aware of that. The rebate of that took the form of a credit note after I left. I am clearly stating here, and have done in my statement, that that should have been - and there was no intention otherwise - presenter earnings.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I was not aware of the other two payments which were subsequently made in 2022, which was over two years after I had left the organisation.

The committee heard evidence as to how the payments were presented as a consultancy fee on the invoices to RTÉ through a UK barter account. To me, that is an act of deceit.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

Sorry, but can I stop the Deputy there, please. I am not the current CFO of RTÉ nor have I been since 2020. I believe that my statement covers that so, with respect, the Deputy may direct the questions at the incoming and current CFO of the organisation.

When these invoices were coming in for the money, and this is a separate question, did Ms O'Keeffe see them?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

No.

She did not see those invoices coming in. That is okay. I will leave Ms O’Keeffe alone now on that point. Has Ms O’Keeffe any update on the €120,000 which was outstanding to Ryan Tubridy as she stated that she had left RTÉ at that stage? As far as Ms O’Keeffe is concerned then, when she left, that €120,000 was still there for Ryan Tubridy. Is that right?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

At the point of the negotiations when I left, we were trying to negotiate the cancellation of the exit payment as part of the negotiation. Mr. Tubridy was due an exit payment at the end of his contract and as part of the negotiations, we were trying to ask him to waive that exit fee so that we did not owe it. That would represent savings. They were part of the overall negotiations and when I left that had not been concluded.

The one good thing I will say today is that Ms O’Keeffe came in today and answered the questions. That is all we asked for. We asked other people to come in and they refused to do so.

One of the Deputies asked earlier about the three barter accounts and Mr. Collins started talking about shopping, etc. My wife does not go to three shops in one day. Does Mr. Collins's wife go to three shops in one day? I am not being smart. That was one of the silliest answers that ever was told us. Mr. Collins knew the question last week about the barter accounts. Mr. Collins knew there were three barter accounts and now he is talking about shopping. That is a disgrace the answer Mr. Collins gave Deputy Munster. Does Mr. Collins really think we will fall for that? Mr. Collins should put up his hand and say he told a lie.

Mr. Richard Collins

No, I did not tell any lie.

Sorry, did Mr. Collins exaggerate the truth then?

Mr. Richard Collins

The Deputy has asked me a question and he should let me answer it. There is one barter account. There are three companies that feed into that. From a financial point of view, I look at a consolidated view there. All the transactions relating to the barter account are captured in what is presented and are available for audit. There are no extra accounts that have suddenly emerged in the past week. Everything was visible there. It is just terminology we are talking about here.

When Mr. Collins was asked the question last week about the barter account, he knew there were three accounts. Why did Mr. Collins not just say there were three accounts because he knew it would come back to haunt him? This is a very experienced committee. Why did Mr. Collins not just come out and say that there is one barter account but there are three parts to the barter account?

Mr. Richard Collins

I was not trying to mislead anyone. The way I look at it is a consolidated view and there are three companies that feed into it. However, I do not look at the individual companies; I look at the overall piece - what it all adds up to. I was not trying to mislead or hide anything there. I am just talking about the barter account.

As a layperson, it seems to me - and the public are there - that Mr. Collins is hiding it. I am being honest with Mr. Collins. The answer that Mr. Collins gave my colleagues here today, and talking about his wife or someone going shopping, was very bad. I am not trying to be funny. This is a very serious situation.

Mr. Richard Collins

Sometimes these issues are complex.

Mr. Richard Collins

I was trying to simplify it to explain to people. At the end of the day, the three companies went through the same process and the transactions were visible in the accounts and they could be audited.

Has Mr. Collins any-----

Mr. Richard Collins

Sorry, just to finish there, all the payments were made out of one company. There were no payments made out of the other two companies.

Sorry, I will go back to this again. Have previous auditors, before Grant Thornton, brought to light anything disguised previously? Was there anything that came up before the Ryan Tubridy one? Basically, I am asking is there anything out there that we should know that will come forward? They got auditors to sign off. What were the auditors looking to sign off?

Mr. Richard Collins

Sorry, can the Deputy repeat the question?

They did audits, right?

Mr. Richard Collins

Yes.

I am sure there were audits done before the Ryan Tubridy issue.

Mr. Richard Collins

Yes.

I am not trying to be smart. It was easy enough to find. How come the previous auditors could not find the discrepancies? I cannot understand that. Who signed them off? If an auditor comes to Mr. Collins and signs them off, who in RTÉ would sign off and accept the sign-offs?

Mr. Richard Collins

Ultimately, the board signs off. The board approves the account and then the auditors sign them.

But someone goes to the board and recommends them to the board on behalf of RTÉ. Is that Mr. Collins's good self? Does Mr. Collins look at the audit? After the audits are done, who looks at the audits? I have my own company. I get people in to do the audits. I am sure that someone in RTÉ signs the audits off and recommends them to the management to accept.

Mr. Richard Collins

The accounts are prepared by the finance team, they are brought for audit and then they are presented to the board. They auditors will raise any issues they have at that stage. When the board is happy that it has gone through all the issues with the auditors, it will sign the accounts. That is the system.

There is something wrong here. In fairness, we keep teasing. Let us hope over the next few weeks that it comes out.

Did someone in RTÉ, after five years, hand a car in yesterday? Who was that?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

For GDPR reasons, we cannot say.

If the Committee of Public Accounts asks Mr. Lynch tomorrow, will he answer the Committee of Public Accounts tomorrow?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

We cannot disclose the person's name but I just wanted to make a full disclosure that that happened.

Was there a car handed in after five years yesterday?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

There was.

Was it Mr. Lynch's car?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

It was not my car.

The Deputy should conclude.

This is the last question. Regarding RTÉ and the Renault - and then the Tubridy - contract, why was it signed off by a member of NK Management after the payment was made to Ryan Tubridy on 21 April 2023? Did Mr. Collins generate this docket after the fact to make the payment? My question is, why was this signed off on behalf of Mr. Tubridy? How come Mr. Tubridy did not sign it off? How come NK Management signed it off instead of Mr. Tubridy?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

I can answer that. We did not deal with Ryan Tubridy on this. We were dealing with NK Management on behalf of Mr. Tubridy. I have already admitted that I should have signed the contract. It was signed by the client. When we were getting information together to go to the Grant Thornton review, Mr. Noel Kelly, obviously, had already also been contacted and they sent in the signed contract at that point. I think it was related to the review that they realised that they needed to send us a signed copy. That is my understanding.

I thank the Chair for her patience.

I thank Deputy Fitzpatrick. I call Senator Carrigy.

I thank the Chair and wish everyone a good afternoon.

Last week, Mr. Lynch said there was a possibility that Ryan Tubridy might have known about an issue with RTÉ accounts ahead of him announcing that he was retiring if one looks at the information. What information is Mr. Lynch referring to?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Just to be clear, the day before I came in to the committee and the Senator asked me that question, I had checked my emails to see because I knew that Ryan Tubridy had told the director of content in mid-March that he was proposing to stand down from "The Late Late Show". I went back and checked my email to see if it coincided with 17 March and what I could find on my email, I think, from 13 and 14 March, was an email of a potential list of other candidates. It was on that basis. At that point, I was not aware that the chief financial officer, CFO, was aware from 6 March. When that was disclosed in the hearing, I then said that I was not saying it happened; I was just saying it is possible when one looks at the dates. That is all.

Mr. Lynch had an email prior to 17 March looking at potential candidates to replace Mr. Tubridy before he resigned.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Correct. I wanted to establish in my own mind if we were talking about other people who could do the show before 17 March, and I was satisfied with that. What I did not realise in the timeline, or omitted or forgot, was that the CFO had spoken to the auditors on 6 March, and potentially spoken to the director general, DG. I am not saying it happened. All I am saying is, from a dates point of view, it is possible.

Who sent Mr. Lynch the email?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I sent the email to the director of content with the list of names and I was able to go and check it before I came in. I am happy to provide it.

Mr. Lynch might provide those emails, over and back, on that date which was prior to 17 March, if he could, as regards who instigated and who first put forward the idea that they needed to be looking at a list of replacement.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

No problem. I will be able to send the committee the email. I will have to redact the names, but I will.

That is fine. In relation to the current contract for Mr. Tubridy, as of today, where is it at and how long do we expect to see Mr. Oliver Callan presenting his show?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

As I explained last week, for editorial reasons Ryan Tubridy cannot be on the air at the moment. We have legal obligations, under the Broadcasting Act, in terms of our independence and impartiality.

In terms of Mr. Tubridy's contract, his contract, which was for radio and television services, ended at the end of May. There were negotiations going on about a radio contract. Those negotiations, as a result of all of this, were suspended. Currently, as we said, we are still paying Mr. Tubridy and there are certain elements of the contract that are in dispute with the agent.

In the previous conversation, Mr. Lynch was not prepared to give the name of the person with regard to the car. At what level within the organisation, executive level, board level, staff level or talent level, was the person who had that car for five years who returned it? I totally understand Mr. Lynch cannot give a person's name but it is justifiable for me to ask at what level within the organisation that person was.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I cannot disclose that because there would be so much speculation around it but I wanted to disclose the fact that, in terms of the information provided to me and what happened yesterday, this was car was given back. Over time, as we go through the process with and on the advice of the data protection office, DPO, and in terms of the register of interests, we can be transparent about that. I am sure it will come out anyway.

There will be much speculation as to who that person is. If Mr. Lynch narrowed it down and gave us the role of that person, it would rule out many other people who are staff within the organisation.

I again ask Mr. Lynch whether he can tell us whether it is a board member, executive, talent or staff.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I cannot do that because it will be too specific and lead to speculation.

I assume by that, there is a narrow group of people it did say what it was in. There is a very small group of people within that.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

That is correct.

I can read into that. The crux of this is trust among the public. To be honest, if the public is looking in here today, it has got worse. At the core of this lie the barter accounts. In the past half hour, the outgoing CFO has stated it was under her control. The new CFO, who took office in 2020, Mr. Collins, said it was not under the control of the CFO and that he brought it under his control. There was a period between January and March where there was a crossover of roles. I am sure that barter account had to have come up in the discussion over that period, whether it was under the control of the CFO or not. For anyone listening to this, trust has gone when the outgoing and new senior financial people are giving two versions.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

Per my recollections about the barter account that had a couple of different suppliers in there, RTÉ finance had financial control over the barter account and the accounting transactions - the revenue and the cost side - were accounted for within the monthly management accounts and, as such, into the annual statements as well. The operational control, that is, what went in and out of it in terms of what was bought with it, was under commercial control. That is per my statement and that is to clarify that. The financial control - the accounting for it, the reporting of it and the reconciliation to barter statements, which we got on a regular basis - was done by the commercial revenue finance manager. The operational control as to what was bought or not out of the account was under commercial control. I hope that clarifies matters.

Mr. Richard Collins

If I can clarify as well, when I came in, the accounts for 2019 were being finalised. A lot of barter transactions went through in 2019 and had not been included in the management accounts during the year so they had to be brought on as a year-end adjustment at that stage. The financial manager in the commercial division was not over this. It was being run by the commercial division. The commercial division was initiating and approving the transactions outside the financial manager there. His role was a book-keeping role effectively.

Auditors have been mentioned. My understanding is an internal audit would have been carried out within the accounts. The role of that person is to be independent. At any stage over the years, was the fact it was not under the control of the CFO ever flagged as an issue, whether it was a high, medium or low risk? Was this ever highlighted at any stage by RTÉ's internal auditor or any external audit that would have been carried out? Did nobody flag that the way this account was being handled was an issue?

Ms Anne O'Leary

I will answer that question. As the chair of the audit and risk committee, at no stage did internal audit even bring up that issue until it was brought onto the balance sheet. There was no report from the auditors Deloitte to me until the one we got in the middle part.

As chair of the committee, did Ms O'Leary have any fears about the way that was being handled or was she unaware of the account?

Ms Anne O'Leary

I was completely unaware of the account. It came as a surprise to me when I spoke to Deloitte. The internal audit team was never pointed in the direction of that audit.

Ms Doherty stated it is a broken system - a broken system she chaired for a significant number of years. I mentioned last week and Mr. Lynch made a comment that it was not the remit of the executive. This committee nominated Larry Bass to be a member of the board of directors, as is its duty as a media committee representing the taxpayer. The reality is the board did not want him. There was a kickback against our committee not to put the name forward. We insisted on the name going forward. Why did the board not want Larry Bass on the board? As we all know, when he attended his first meeting, he resigned or was thrown under a bus to make sure he did resign. Maybe it was the case that if Larry Bass had been there, someone with professional experience in media, he might have been able to highlight some of these issues.

Ms Moya Doherty

I appeared before this committee a number of years ago and answered all the questions relating to this, but I must state that regarding the appointment to the board of RTÉ of an individual whose sole income comes from RTÉ and who then has to recuse himself from a meeting so that the board can agree huge contracts to that individual, we took advice from Professor Niamh Brennan, whom the Minister is now putting in charge. Professor Brennan advised the board that this was a huge conflict of interest. Larry Bass was not thrown under a bus. Larry Bass was not asked to resign. Larry Bass resigned to protect his own company. It was a conflict of interest and I hope we learn from that.

We spoke about staff wages. All through the years, there were significantly high wages at executive level within the organisation. There are more than 110 managers in a company of 1,800 employees, which is extremely high when you look at any other company around the country. As chair of the board all through those years, could Ms Doherty justify the significant number of these roles and the fact they were all on more than €100,000 per head? Total executive wages come to about €2.4 million. Does Ms Ní Raghallaigh think this is value for money for the public?

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

The wage levels are what is there and what was negotiated and would be negotiated according to market rates, as I would imagine. With regard to the board, the only executive we are directly involved in hiring is the director general. That salary is as set out by the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. That contract is as set out by the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. We use the same template with regard to that. Regarding other executives, I assume the level is set and, accordingly, other levels are pitched at that.

With regard to the wage levels for the talent end of it, I know a Bill will be debated in the Seanad in about half an hour that would put a cap on those significant wages. We think €400,000 or €500,000 is high. Ten years ago, it was €700,000, €800,000 or €900,000. Would Ms Ní Raghallaigh be supportive of a cap?

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

I stated last week that I believed the market has moved on since perhaps this was custom and practice ten years ago in terms of high levels. My feeling is that RTÉ is bidding against itself in a marketplace. I think we should let the market settle and see where it settles. That would be the correct commercial way to handle this.

Down through the years, the board has been self-evaluated. Do the witnesses think this is the right way to evaluate how a board is working - to evaluate yourselves?

Ms Moya Doherty

Clearly in the dark hours of the night, all my board colleagues and I look at how we performed here and what we could have done better. I hope the new chair and the board can learn from that and that things can be stronger with stronger corporate governance and new systems in place to make RTÉ a better place.

We are looking at the figures relating to Toy Show The Musical. I know this committee previously queried the musical and how its timing clashed with Christmas pantomimes that had been funded by the State. Of the 20,000 tickets, 9,000 were either promotional or complimentary, so 45% of the people who attended did so free of charge.

It seems an outstanding number of tickets to give out.

"The Late Late Toy Show" is associated with Ryan Tubridy as the presenter. What role did he have in it? Did he back it? Did he support it?

Mr. Rory Coveney

Ryan had no input into the show at all. There were discussions with the producers and Ryan about it and he did not have any interest in it.

This is the person who is being paid €500,000 by the taxpayer and who is working for RTÉ. RTÉ is taking a risk, as Mr. Coveney said, in putting on a show. The person who presents the show that is called “The Late Late Toy Show” and who promotes it was not willing to engage.

Mr. Rory Coveney

He was supportive of the project and the producers. He just did not see a role for himself in it. The show, as it was written, was not about “The Late Late Toy Show”. It was about a family on toy show night, so there was never a character in the show for him. It was a very particular interpretation of toy show night and what happens in Ireland in a community, so there was no obvious role for him in it. There were discussions with the two producers and Ryan about it and he just declined to get involved.

He declined to get involved with a show that RTÉ was putting forward at significant financial risk to the company. He declined.

Mr. Rory Coveney

"The Late Late Show" supported the show - the guests were on, the actors were on, there were songs played on it, and so on, but he himself was not involved in the show.

I ask Ms Ní Raghallaigh to come back in. We have to get the trust of people back in RTÉ, which is a public broadcasting company. Does she feel there needs to be widespread change at the top level, both at board level and at executive board level, for her to continue in her role in a new RTÉ going forward?

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

I think everything has to be looked at and that includes the top level. That is a discussion with the incoming director general. As I said last week, there is a serious cultural issue in terms of how the executive board operates. That is not to say there are not good people there. It is the culture within the organisation and, as I said, that can permeate right down through the organisation. I agree with the Senator. This is the core of what we have to do and it is a big undertaking. That is the challenge but that is what we are going to do.

Can a copy of the board’s self-evaluation papers be furnished to the committee?

Is that possible?

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

I assume so, yes.

Last week, it was stated that the chief financial officer was only in the role for three days when the 2017, 2018 and 2019 top talent earnings were released on 20 January 2021. In the opening statement from Ms O’Keeffe, she questioned that and said that information was incorrect.

Mr. Richard Collins

That was a mistake on my part to confuse the years. When that information was published, I had been in the role for a year. What I would say is that the information that was published had been prepared by the time I joined and it had been audited. No changes were made to the figures that were published from what was presented to the auditors at the time I joined.

Again, in Ms O’Keeffe's opening statement, she states that she was advised by either the DG or the head of content that a commercial arrangement had been proposed. Does Ms O’Keeffe know who that proposal was from?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I am sorry; will the Deputy repeat the question?

Ms O’Keeffe said in her opening statement that either the DG or the head of content proposed the commercial arrangement. This is when negotiations had essentially broken down, the agent representing Mr. Tubridy had rejected the proposal that was on the table and it then emerged that a commercial arrangement had been proposed. Does Ms O’Keeffe know who that was proposed by?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

As I say in my statement, my recollection is it was either the director general or the head of content.

Okay, so one of those proposed this commercial agreement.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

The initial commercial arrangement.

The initial commercial arrangement. With regard to Ms O’Keeffe's role as CFO, I appreciate she is no longer in the position. In terms of the oversight of the expenditure on the barter account, I know she has stated that she had financial control. What does financial control mean? Ms O’Keeffe had access to expenditure and if there was an item there that needed clarity, is that something she would go back to the head of commercial to get clarification on? What does financial oversight or control look like?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

In terms of the barter account, my recollection is that the numbers involved were around €300,000. That is my recollection and I am not saying that is specific. I do not have access to any RTÉ records and neither do I have access to any RTÉ personnel to confirm this but my recollection is that the value was around €300,000 in terms of airtime. That is less than 0.5% of the total airtime. My concern at the time for the organisation was that the commercial targets were reached - €180 million to €200 million - and I worked with Geraldine O’Leary in that regard. On the cost front, budgets were set for each department, including sales, and they had their own budgets. Commercial finance developed those budgets with the commercial department, and as long as they adhered to those budgets and did not run over budget, that was our concern. That is what I mean by financial control from a monetary point of view.

Would Ms O’Keeffe have got an itemised expenditure list?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

No.

No. It was not that level of financial control. Okay.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

We had €350 million of costs.

That is perfect. On a question to the current chief financial officer, Mr. Collins, when did he bring the barter account onto the balance sheet? What year was that?

Mr. Richard Collins

It was March 2020. It was part of the 2019 accounts.

In his evidence last week, when questioned, he said that in terms of 2022, about €330,000 went through the account, and in 2019, €500,000 went through it.

Mr. Richard Collins

In gross terms. It was a bit less than €500,000.

In gross terms. That was a driving factor as to why Mr. Collins decided to-----

Mr. Richard Collins

Yes, it was a significant figure.

Did Mr. Collins have a conversation with the director of commercial?

Mr. Richard Collins

No, that was an accounting matter.

Obviously, Mr. Collins had concerns. Did he express those concerns in terms of what was a sizeable increase, given what the ex-CFO has said, in the expenditure on some of these junkets and the slush fund on which we have heard the evidence.

Mr. Richard Collins

That happened before I joined. When I joined RTÉ, it was explained by the director general-----

But Mr. Collins obviously had concerns about the huge increase.

Mr. Richard Collins

The concern I had was that it was not accounted for in the accounts. It was not in the management accounts; it was not in the year-end accounts. Good accounting practice would bring it onto the accounts there and make it transparent. I took comfort from the fact that a senior director was managing it and the director general seemed to be close to what was going on in the account. There was a certain element of trust there. In hindsight, would I have done things differently? Yes, I think I would have done things differently.

In terms of the agreement being underwritten, Ms O’Keeffe said it was at the request of Mr. Noel Kelly that the agreement would be underwritten by RTÉ and she stated that she opposed that. Why did she oppose that?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

Because guaranteeing the commercial arrangement posed a risk and a potential exposure - a cost exposure and a liability exposure - to the organisation if the commercial arrangement was not fulfilled.

So Ms O’Keeffe was doing her job and she expressed those serious concerns regarding the potential risk if that agreement was underwritten by RTÉ.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I did but, just to confirm, when I left the organisation, there was no support from RTÉ to provide that type of guarantee.

That was my view but it also was the view of the director general, the head of content, and the RTÉ solicitor at the time; just to confirm that.

In terms of the handover from Ms O'Keeffe to the incoming chief financial officer, CFO, she has stated she briefed extensively in terms of the negotiations and where things were at. I imagine she would have relayed that critical element to Mr. Collins who was the incoming CFO, that there was an attempt or a suggestion it would be underwritten.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

Yes. All elements of the Ryan Tubridy deal were discussed, not only with Mr. Collins, but also with everyone else involved. Therefore, everyone was aware. My recollection is that everyone was up to date. What I would say, is the brief of the RTÉ CFO is really wide and there is a huge number of elements to it. There are the networks, the concert orchestras, the commercial, the licence fee, the projections, the bank borrowings; I could go on. There is a long list and all of those areas.

I am conscious of the time here. Was Mr. Collins aware that there was a suggestion that this agreement would be underwritten?

Mr. Richard Collins

I do not specifically remember but I am sure it was.

Would you have expressed concerns or an opinion?

Mr. Richard Collins

As I said earlier in the meeting, I consulted notes of a meeting I attended with the director general, the director of content and the in-house solicitor and it was confirmed by the director general on that date, which was 30 April, that there was going to be no underwriting.

Mr. Lynch wants to come in there.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Just to be clear, I have had a look at the file and firstly, it is great that Ms Breda O'Keeffe is here today to give her side of the story. I was made aware at the end of last week, and as Ms O'Keeffe has recognised today, of the fact that she was aware that the Renault deal was going to be cost-neutral. I think there may be a view that there was an interpretation from the agent that meant there would be underwriting for the five years, which is absolutely incorrect. My review of the file is that the agent provided a letter that was never signed and was pushing to have a letter signed over a period of time. That all culminated after Ms O'Keeffe had left the organisation. This is important.

I asked Mr. Lynch if there were any further side letters in relation to that deal and he said "No". What letter am I missing in that? I apologise to the Deputy.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

In terms of the Renault deal, there is no other side letter in existence but Mr. Kelly-----

But there is a letter from Mr. Kelly relating to-----

Mr. Adrian Lynch

-----had been provided to do with-----

Mr. Adrian Lynch

-----underwriting the overall agreement over a period of time. Subsequent to that, from what I can see in the file, and from what Mr. Collins has told me-----

This is where it will be very interesting-----

Can I remind members that there is a vote in the Dáil so we will have to suspend to allow for that? Do they want to proceed just to finish? They only have a couple of seconds left anyway.

I will come back because there are a few other questions.

The Deputy is out of time.

In fairness, the Cathaoirleach gave other Deputies a few minutes and I have had some interruption as well. I would appreciate it if I could come back.

I will give Deputy Brady latitude of another two minutes. I am reminding him that he is already out of time. I am giving him another two minutes and that should get us over to the Dáil for the vote.

Last week, when Mr. Coveney was asked around the figures for Toy Show The Musical, he said they were commercially sensitive. Now we have some of those figures which show there was a loss of €2.2 million. It seems they were more personally, than commercially, sensitive. Was the barter account used to specifically cover any costs associated with the "The Late Late Toy Show"?

Mr. Rory Coveney

No.

No costs whatsoever were covered. Okay.

Mr. Rory Coveney

Just on that, the Deputy will notice from the figures released that we have not released third party contract details because there are two parties involved and they are commercially sensitive and negotiated. We have released all the financial information we can but we have not released any-----

However there were no costs whosoever covered by the barter account.

Mr. Rory Coveney

No.

Last week, the CFO said that the taxpayer was potentially defrauded and that he would have to get advice as to whether he should speak to An Garda Síochána in relation to that very serious charge. Has Mr. Coveney taken the opportunity to get advice?

Mr. Richard Collins

No, because the legal advice is that fraud has not occurred here.

Mr. Richard Collins

What occurred here was-----

Mr. Collins made a very serious charge last week that in his view the taxpayer was potentially defrauded and he said he was going to get advice.

Mr. Richard Collins

No, I never said I was going to get advice.

Mr. Collins did say he was going to advice.

Will Deputy Brady allow Mr. Collins to answer the question?

Mr. Richard Collins

I did not say I was going to get advice. I said in my opinion that maybe the taxpayer was defrauded. I am not a lawyer. I was not talking from a legal point of view. It has been confirmed earlier in this meeting that no fraud has occurred here.

Okay. Just to conclude,-----

This is the last question.

-----I want to go to the tripartite agreement which certainly is a foundation document. It states on the back page that once signed by all parties, this agreement will constitute a legally binding document and it is acknowledged that there is a valid consideration for the agreement. When I first read it, I saw an agent had signed it on behalf of Mr. Ryan Tubridy. At first, I thought the date on it, which was 21 April 2023, was a mistake. Can the witnesses confirm this date is accurate?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

As I said, I think it was when we were collating the information when I was advised about Grant Thornton. NK Management sent in the contract with the signatures. My assumption, but it is an assumption, is that it was also contacted by Grant Thornton. It knew it was going to be in when it decided to sign.

That concludes the Deputy's contribution.

We know the issue first arose on-----

That really does conclude-----

It is an important point. I want to finish off on this issue.

I have given the Deputy as much-----

Will the Cathaoirleach allow me to come back in when we-----

No. I have given the Deputy as much time as possible.

I will finish on this.

I have given everybody as much time as possible-----

It is very important that this-----

-----and I will have to suspend. I am going to proceed to-----

-----is a foundation document that led to payments.

-----suspend the meeting because we have to go to vote in the Dáil.

Sitting suspended at 4.47 p.m. and resumed at 5.05 p.m.

I apologise to the witnesses for the interruption, but that is the nature of a Wednesday evening in the Dáil. We may be over and back for votes, so I ask the witnesses to bear with us. I know it is disturbing when we are trying to get through so much.

If Deputy Brady is asking a question, looking for an answer or making a statement, he has one minute.

It is just to get clarity about the contract, that is, the tripartite agreement. It was only a month and a half after Deloitte raised concerns about the consultancy fee invoices that this contract was signed by an agent representing Ryan Tubridy. No one has signed it on behalf of RTÉ. The second last paragraph in the contract reads that, once signed by all parties, the agreement would constitute a legally binding document and it would be acknowledged that there had been a valid consideration of the agreement. Without those key signatures, has anyone checked this foundational document, which led to three payments being made to Mr. Tubridy, to determine the legality of this entire saga? The two signatures-----

Is the Deputy asking his question of Mr. Lynch?

Or anyone who can provide an answer.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I will let the commercial director answer regarding the dates and so forth. I saw that contract for the first time last week. What actually underwrites the entire contract is a verbal agreement. As the Deputy will notice from reading the contract, there is no clause for underwriting, there is no clause for a €75,000 payment. It is literally an event sponsorship agreement. This entire contract is dependent on a verbal agreement that was given on 7 May 2020 by the director general to Noel Kelly.

Furthermore, we contacted the agent in March 2023 to get clarification around the invoices. We received confirmation of what the invoices were, their numbers and the fact that they were sent based on a verbal agreement between the agent and the director general. That was the clarification we got in, I believe, March of this year.

When we think about the tripartite agreement, everyone goes “That is everything that was being-----

Then why would the agent feel the need on 21 April 2023 to sign this agreement, given those discussions and everything else we know about what has happened and what has hit the fan? Only a month and a half beforehand, the agent was solely focused on trying to get its legal house in order. Has RTÉ checked out the legality of this contract?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

No.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

No. The tripartite agreement, as it is being called, was to substantiate. It was rightly requested by Renault before it agreed to make the payment. I believe I mentioned it already, but we had a number of meetings. We were going through the logistics of where the events were and what the dates were. The dates kept moving. I should have signed the agreement. I cannot comment on why NK Management signed it in April. That may be a question the Deputy can ask NK Management.

I thank the witnesses and my colleague. Next is Deputy O’Sullivan, who has ten minutes.

I want to bring it back to the car that was out on loan for a five-year period. That seems like an extraordinarily long time. Why was the car only returned yesterday?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

As part of this process, I looked for clarification regarding staff members, contractors, any commercial engagements and so on. In that process, this came up and the car was returned.

This individual was approached to return the car.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I do not know the details of it. I just know the car was returned.

We would assume that, after this situation came up, the individual was approached. I understand why, for reasons of sensitivity, Mr. Lynch cannot name the individual or say in what area of RTÉ he or she may have worked. Can Mr. Lynch at least name the brand of car that was returned?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

No, I cannot.

Does Mr. Lynch know what brand it was? Was it a Renault?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I cannot comment on that.

Mr. Lynch knows which brand but cannot comment on it.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Correct.

Mr. Lynch also mentioned, when it was originally brought it up, that this was not approved. He said that at the outset. He said this was not approved.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

That is my understanding, but this will be subject to a process.

How does that happen? How does someone get a five-year car loan and not get approval for it?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

In terms of the employee handbook, anybody who has a commercial arrangement like that needs approval from their line manager.

Again, it is an example of oversight, that something like that could happen without approval. Mr. Lynch said he receives a car allowance. Is that a full car allowance?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

It is.

Is it a full allowance?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Yes.

Does Mr. Lynch drive to work everyday?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I do not drive to work everyday but I drive to work.

Does Mr. Lynch drive to work most days?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Yes.

Would he use the car more than he would use public transport to go to work?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I would say it is 50:50.

Would he not think that would merit maybe not claiming the full car allowance if it is a 50:50 breakdown?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

For total transparency, as I said, when I joined RTÉ I was provided with a salary and a car allowance.

Would Mr. Lynch not think it might be appropriate, because he only uses it for 50% of the time, to hand back the full allowance?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

There is one thing I would like to clarify in terms of that. If I am ever using that car for business of any sort, I never charge mileage. I rarely charge for my mobile phone. I bought my own computers, etc., so I do not charge for that. I do not charge for A116s and for overnights if I am travelling for business.

Mr. Lynch still claims the full allowance even though he uses it half the time.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

The Deputy can ask about my expenses. They are minimal in any year.

That is okay.

I will move on to Ms Ní Raghallaigh. Will she answer this as honestly as possible? I appreciate the comments she has already made in terms of what she can and cannot say. She said quite clearly she is unhappy with the drip feed of information. She said confidence is eroding in the executive board. Interestingly, she also said that she expects more information to emerge. That is quite outstanding. Given that she is unhappy with the drip feed and she expects more information to emerge, can she really stand over this and say that she has full confidence in the executive board?

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

What I said was that given the pattern of how things have been happening over the past short while, it is probable there will be more.

It is probable that there will be more. Is Ms Ní Raghallaigh still not willing to say that she does not have confidence in the executive board at the moment?

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

I have stated what I have stated, that confidence has eroded. I have made this statement in my opening statement in relation to it.

Will Ms Ní Raghallaigh elaborate more on it because again that is a very interesting statement that it is probable, because of the trends, that more information will emerge and more revelations will emerge. Can she elaborate on that? Is there something in particular she is expecting to emerge or is this just because of trends? Can she just elaborate on what she means by she "expects more"?

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

If I ask a question and I get an answer and then the answer changes, because somebody realises, "Oh, actually, it should be this", that is exactly what I am talking about. It is not that there is any-----

She expects more. I do as well, by the way. I appreciate that, and also that she is slightly hampered in terms of what she can say.

I will move to Ms O'Keeffe. If the former director general, Dee Forbes, was here, one of the questions I would ask her would be whether she feels like she was thrown under a bus. That term has come up quite a lot. Does she feel like she was thrown under a bus by the RTÉ statement last week and by the remainder of the executive board? I say that because of the content of the statement. I would like to ask Ms O'Keeffe the same question. Does she feel like she was thrown under a bus? Does she feel she had to come here today to clear her name in some way, shape or form? What I mean by that is that the statement from last week goes straight into it. It states that on 19 December, following a meeting between the director general, the agent and the then RTÉ CFO, which was Ms O'Keeffe, a financial proposal was set out to the agent which stated an offset of the exit payment due in his previous contract, a 15% cut in fees from RTÉ in reference to facilitating a possible additional commercial agreement. The way this was presented appeared to me that there was straight away an effort by the existing members of the executive to distance themselves and very handily put the blame at the feet of the former director general who is no longer on the executive board, and the former CFO, Ms O'Keeffe, who is no longer on the executive board. Does Ms O'Keeffe feel that she had to come here to clear her name? Does she feel that essentially she was thrown under the bus?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

That is a tough one. I worked for RTÉ for 18 years. Of that, eight years were as CFO. I hope I did some good. I am proud of the organisation and what we achieve. I am still proud of what we do. It is important to me and my reputation, but also a bit for the organisation. There are an awful lot of people in the organisation. Maybe I am wandering off my own script here today because I feel very strongly about this. There are an awful of people currently in the organisation who work so hard for the organisation. RTÉ was challenged with a very broken funding model, so we had constant challenges at reducing costs over the years. I wanted to set the record straight with my recollections of events. I hope I have done that.

Would Ms O'Keeffe say she did not feel that the RTÉ statement from last week represented her part or her role in what has transpired?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I would say my recollections were more akin to what happened. That is my view. My recollections are my recollections. I am a detail person. I always have been. I go into the detail when I think of it. My statement is more detailed and it contains my recollections.

Very briefly, does Ms O'Keeffe feel that the former DG was essentially thrown under a bus by that statement?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I cannot comment on that. If Deputy O'Sullivan feels my recollections conflict with others then, I am not in a position to answer that.

I do and I think Ms O'Keeffe has taken that opportunity to clear her name. As I said, the way it was presented, and the way I interpreted it, it was very much laying the blame on the former director general and the former chief financial officer, which is Ms O'Keeffe.

I will move on to Ms O'Leary. On accountability, and this is something Deputy Munster tried to get to the bottom of. Ms O'Leary acknowledged she knew the invoices that were raised, those two €75,000 invoices, were for Mr. Tubridy. She said last week that she could not recollect whether she saw the term "consultancy fees" on those invoices. She also said in a response to me that it was probably someone within her office who would have seen that. Even if it was someone within her office, at the end of the day, she is head of the commercial side. Does she not feel she should now be accountable and take responsibility for what transpired, and the fact that a red flag was not raised?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

I will come to the last part second. In regard to the raising of the invoices, my assistant deals with the barter company, so she would be the person who liaises with it.

Therefore, she would have seen the term "consultancy fees".

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

I asked her to liaise with Noel Kelly to raise the invoices. I have said consistently since March that I do not remember where the term "consultancy fees" came, whether it was from Ms Forbes, the director general at the time, or in a conversation with Noel Kelly. Unfortunately, I know that is really frustrating but I will not tell-----

We know consultancy service was written on the invoices according to-----

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

Yes, but I can tell the Deputy that the one person who did not decide that was my assistant because she-----

However, she would have seen-----

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

She raised the invoices, yes.

She raised the invoices, so she would have seen "consultancy fees" but did not liaise with Ms O'Leary. There was no communication. It is very easy to say my "assistant", but surely the ultimate responsibility lies with Ms O'Leary.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

Absolutely, I am being very clear about that. I am being very clear that the responsibility lies with me, and absolutely not with her. She was doing the administration. Can I be really clear about that? As I sit here now, should I have asked more questions? The answer, of course, is "yes".

I appreciate that. I have two more questions. One is in regard to Toy Show the Musical-----

I remind the Deputies the bell has gone again. Be mindful of that.

It is gone a few minutes.

I will not be long. In regard to Toy Show The Musical, it must have been clear from the outset that this was going to be a flop given the numbers of seats being sold in the Convention Centre, Dublin.

I will interrupt Deputy O'Sullivan. Can we pause? I know he has two more questions. I will give him the same latitude as I gave everybody else, so I will suspend to allow us to go and vote. We will then return. I apologise to other colleagues.

Sitting suspended at 5.19 p.m. and resumed at 5.35 p.m.

Deputy O'Sullivan has some time left, so I ask him to continue his line of questioning.

I was discussing Toy Show The Musical, that production-----

I ask the Deputy to bear with us for a moment. The broadcasting unit does not-----

I was discussing Toy Show The Musical. I presume it was clear from the outset, when you were struggling to sell tickets and had empty auditoriums, that the show was not going to be a success. Did anybody think to cry “Stop” and desist with the continuation of the production?

Mr. Rory Coveney

On the first week, the houses were quite full. The real tipping point came on the first weekend which was 17 December, when we had to cancel shows because the cast got sick. That completely stalled the momentum and we lost 6,700 odd tickets in 24 hours and about €250,000 of income.

Mr. Coveney mentioned earlier that Mr. Tubridy did not want to get involved in the production creatively or in any way.

Mr. Rory Coveney

This was not a hostile conversation but he was just not interested in it.

Was Mr. Tubridy at any point was asked for a recording to promote the show? Is there any truth in what we heard?

Mr. Rory Coveney

There were discussions as to how he might participate but in the end he did not.

Was he asked directly for a recording to promote Toy Show The Musical and did he refuse?

Mr. Rory Coveney

No. There were discussions about how he might participate in the story itself. Obviously could not participate in the show because he was doing his own show, so that would have been a recording but in the end it did not come to anything.

Was Mr. Coveney disappointed with the lack of promotion in his own shows? Obviously, he had “The Late Late Show” and his own radio show. I am not sure how much promotion he did for the production within his own shows. Did that issue arise?

Mr. Rory Coveney

No. "The Late Late Show" did quite a bit to support the show.

My final question is for both the former and current CFOs. There was an article in The Sunday Times recently stating that the RTÉ bosses knew of the Ryan Tubridy secret payments in February 2020. At that point, if I am correct, there was an overlap in roles. In other words, there was a comprehensive handing over of roles. What do our witnesses make of that claim in The Sunday Times that they were aware of this €120,000 of undisclosed payment and would they comment on that please?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

Is the Deputy asking about €120,000 undisclosed-----

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

That is the exit payment.

I am asking about any of the undisclosed payments, yes.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

My statement covers that but I think the Deputy is probably referring to the two €75,000 payments. That claim is absolutely false.

The Sunday Times is incorrect.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

It is absolutely false that I was aware. They had not even happened at that stage.

Mr. Collins would have been in his position in RTÉ in February 2020. Again, The Sunday Times claimed that RTÉ bosses would have known of the undisclosed payments. Has he any comment on that?

Mr. Richard Collins

If the Deputy is talking about the two €75,000 payments, no. They did not happen until a couple of years later. No-----

The article refers to a €120,000 exit fee, actually.

Mr. Richard Collins

The exit fee.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

The exit payment and clause was in the contract, so it was known by me as it was due and payable. The exit payment owing in the current contract was due to be paid to Mr. Tubridy and was not paid in February 2020.

Did Ms O’Keeffe know that it was not disclosed?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

No.

I ask Mr. Collins the same question.

Mr. Richard Collins

I think what the Deputy is talking about are the disclosed or published earnings for 2017 to 2019.

I am talking about the exit payment of €120,000 that was undisclosed during that period which The Sunday Times states RTÉ bosses were aware of in February 2020.

Mr. Richard Collins

I am unclear as to what €120,000 the Deputy is referring to.

It is the exit fee, I assume.

Mr. Richard Collins

The exit fee was not carried forward, was not paid and was not accrued anywhere. It just did not happen.

I will pick up on it later. I thank the Cathaoirleach.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

My statement covers all the various elements of that, the exit payment, which was due, the cancellation of that and the original idea of the rebate of the €75,000.

There are a number of different figures. What I knew, I have stated clearly in my recollection that I have put on record to date.

I thank the witnesses for joining us again today. It is very much appreciated. I will start with the CFO, Mr. Collins. Your predecessor, Ms O'Keeffe, tells us that you have been in the CFO role since January 2020, months before the date that you indicated last week.

Mr. Richard Collins

Just to clarify, I joined RTÉ on 15 January. I took over as CFO at the start of March. That is when the finance team started reporting to me.

Okay. You stated last week that you were not in the role a wet week until the so-called top talent listings were published.

Mr. Richard Collins

I clarified earlier that that was confusion on my part. I got the years wrong there. It was a year after I joined. What I said was that the figures that were presented for publication did not change from what had been calculated before I arrived and audited at that stage.

Ms O'Keeffe also stated that she fully informed you, in early 2020, of all aspects of Ryan Tubridy's contract negotiations. Is that correct?

Mr. Richard Collins

Yes. I would have been briefed. I do not remember the exact details, but I would have been briefed on where the contract was at at that stage.

Did you read the contract and understand elements within it?

Mr. Richard Collins

There are two elements to the contract. There is the five-year contract and the commercial contract. I never saw the commercial contract. I was not involved in the negotiations there. The other contract-----

Sorry, you said earlier that you were aware of the commercial contract.

Mr. Richard Collins

Yes, I was aware of the commercial contract.

But you did not contribute.

Mr. Richard Collins

No, I did not contribute to it. Just to repeat, I think the issue is around this guarantee or indemnity that was given. I was at a meeting on 30 March where it was discussed. The DG, the director of content and the solicitor were at that meeting as well. It was confirmed by the DG that we would not be giving any indemnity. Things changed, obviously, a week later.

Last week, at the meeting at the Committee of Public Accounts, when asked about extra payments to Mr. Tubridy, you said "I was not aware of anything until the process started with Grant Thornton."

Mr. Richard Collins

Correct.

To clarify, you actually knew about the commercial element of the contract but you have subsequently stated that you were only aware of these payments once they were flagged in the subsequent routine Deloitte audit. Is that correct?

Mr. Richard Collins

That is correct, yes. I became aware of them when they came up with the audit. These payments were not visible or transparent. The two invoices that were paid through the barter account were described as consultancy. It was not possible to know what they were.

So, if you had read the commercial contract you would have known that a core element of that would have related to the underwriting of these payments. Is that correct?

Mr. Richard Collins

I never saw the commercial contract. I only saw it for the first time about a week and a half ago.

A week and a half ago.

Mr. Richard Collins

Yes.

However, your predecessor brought clarity in relation to the bizarre and, frankly, ridiculous situation of RTÉ underwriting the commercial agreement with Ryan Tubridy and the sponsor of "The Late Late Show", Renault. Initially, Ms O'Keeffe said that the request from Noel Kelly Management to put the taxpayer on the hook was flatly rejected.

Mr. Richard Collins

That is correct.

What happened subsequent to Ms O'Keeffe leaving RTÉ?

Mr. Richard Collins

All I can say is that I attended this meeting on 30 April, when it was confirmed that there would be no guarantee given. Based on the statement that was issued by the deputy director general, there was a subsequent meeting-----

Who attended that?

Mr. Richard Collins

-----seven days later, I think, involving the DG and the in-house solicitor. That meeting was with Noel Kelly. At that stage-----

Mr. Richard Collins

-----a guarantee or indemnity was given.

Can you confirm who was present at that meeting?

Mr. Richard Collins

I was not at the meeting. I am only quoting from the statement.

Can any of our witnesses shed some light on who was at that meeting?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

From the note, I think it was the DG, an RTÉ lawyer, Noel Kelly and one other person from the agency.

Have you reviewed the note on file in relation to how the commercial agreement was subsequently underwritten by RTÉ?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Correct.

Can you provide that information today?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

No, that information is under legal privilege.

Legal privilege.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Correct.

And that is why we are here today.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Yes. Just to explain why legal privilege is very important to RTÉ, obviously, RTÉ has a significant editorial output and we receive legal advice in relation to that. Legal privilege is very important for that, and it is very important for the independence of RTÉ. We have shared, which is important, the fact that it was confirmed to us by the agent via email in March 2023 that the agreement is underwritten by a verbal agreement between Dee Forbes and Noel Kelly. As I said on the first day of giving evidence, when Dee Forbes provided that, it was a commercial decision that came with risks, and that, as DG, she was in her right to do it if she wanted to do it. I worked with Dee Forbes for six or seven years and always found her to be a person of integrity. I do not know why-----

Can I ask-----

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Sorry, Deputy can I finish?

The CFO who was in place previously, who flatly rejected the commercial arrangement that was going to be entered into, subsequently leaves RTÉ and all of a sudden her successor is not aware of it and a unilateral decision is made.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Correct. In terms of my review of the documentation that I carried out after the Thursday on which the board statement was released, I looked at the legal file and constructed the narrative from that. I also asked each individual executive board member to give me a guarantee that they knew nothing about the underwriting, which was given to me.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

If I may clarify a point. The Deputy said I firmly opposed the guarantee at that stage. I was not alone in the rejection of the guarantee at that stage. When I left the organisation, nobody was in favour of guaranteeing underwriting the overall contract. I mentioned earlier that there was a-----

So, the statement issued by the former DG outlining that all executives were informed of the dealings in relation to the contractual arrangement was incorrect?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I just wanted to clarify when you said-----

We appreciate you coming here.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

You said that I opposed the guarantee. I do not want to be the only one in that position. I cannot remember the dates but based on my recollection, at the time when I left the organisation the DG, myself, the solicitor and head of content were all not in favour of the guarantee. We could see the risk in that. I am sorry to-----

We received a communication today from Ryan Tubridy and Noel Kelly. I hope they will come to committee in public session and furnish us with the information in relation to that conversation. I will move on.

I think Mr. Lynch wants to add to that.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I just want to add a point of clarification. As I said earlier, I think having Breda O'Keeffe's evidence today has been extremely helpful in bringing clarity to the actual events that happened, because she was a central witness to them. In her evidence, Ms O'Keeffe has said that she was aware of the fact that the deal with Renault in the first year would most likely be cost-neutral. This is an important point. Any correspondence relating to guarantees that might have been exchanged between herself and the agent would be referring to one year.

Would that be a fair reflection Ms O'Keeffe?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I have no sight of any correspondence Adrian.

We understand that Mr. Lynch, but the concealment of further payments for year 2 and year 3 are the real concern here in terms of the manner in which they were actually processed.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Correct. It is an important clarification.

I thank Mr. Lynch. I appreciate that. On the commercial department's remit, will Ms O' Leary tell the committee if any of the corporate hospitality guests are from the public sector or any semi-State agencies?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

I would have to check. We deal with clients and we bring a mix of clients and agencies to events. There are 11 years of events listed on the sheets in front of the committee members. I could not answer that.

Will Ms O'Leary furnish the committee with a list of those and what events they actually attended?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

In relation to?

Public sector and semi-State agencies.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

Yes.

I am conscious of time but I have a question for Ms Ní Raghallaigh, the chair of RTÉ. From the figures that were released last night it appears that ten people from the executive board oversaw all of this. These people take home in the region of €2.3 million collectively. Do Ms Ní Raghallaigh's board colleagues justify their annual salary at that level of around €240,000 per year?

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

As I said previously when this question came up, the board is responsible for the hiring of the director general. After that the deputy director general is empowered. I believe it is something that we have to look at in the context of everything in terms of the organisation. The rate of the director general's salary is set by the Department Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. Everything is pegged on that, I guess, from there down.

Has Ms Ní Raghallaigh asked her colleagues within RTÉ that they will not seek resignation because of the importance of the work that we have to do over the coming weeks on the internal and external reports, in order to fix the situation we are currently in?

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

I am not going to talk about any discussions I am having in relation to individuals because of-----

My final question to Mr. Coveney is about the impact of the financial losses of more than €2.2 million on Toy Show The Musical. What impact will this have on RTÉ's operations and programming for the upcoming fiscal year?

Mr. Rory Coveney

It was netted off on last year's accounts, so it has already happened. It was an impact on our finances. As to the ongoing impact of it, I do not think it will have a material impact. It is certainly something that professionally I am very disappointed with in that it turned out the way it did. It started with the best of ambitions and it did not work out as we hoped. We will have to consider now whether there is an opportunity to reconstitute it in some way but that is for the future.

Mr. Coveney predicted €3.2 million in revenue yet ended up with a total revenue of €496,000. How did Mr. Coveney get the forecasting so wrong?

Mr. Rory Coveney

The audience was not there in the end for a lot of complicated reasons. Ultimately, we did not have enough shows and we did not have enough of an audience. This was despite a huge effort by a whole range of people to try to make it work. We just did not get a big enough audience. It happens with shows and with projects. Sometimes great projects work and sometimes they do not. We have lots of TV shows that do not work and get much smaller audiences then we would hope. As I have said, it was not from lack of effort. A huge amount of analysis went into it and we were, obviously, hugely disappointed.

Were barter accounts in existence prior to Ms O'Keeffe joining RTÉ as chief financial officer, CFO?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

Were barter accounts in existence before 2012? It is my recollection that I think they were introduced around that time. I do not have access to records so I cannot confirm it.

Maybe I will rephrase it. Did Ms O'Keeffe implement barter accounts or were they previously in existence before she joined as CFO?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I can absolutely confirm that I did not implement barter accounts but as I said, they are a recognised way of trading spare media. I did not-----

We understand that, and that it is 1% of the overall trading income. Ms O'Keeffe was in control of the financial elements of it. The commercial department is over the operational element. It was off balance sheet during Ms O'Keeffe's time. Is that correct?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I have no access to records so my recollection is that it was accounted for in revenue. I recall it being in figures that we reviewed with trading-----

We now know it was off balance sheet in terms of the return on the basis of what we have heard from the current CFO. Why was it off balance sheet? What checks and balances were done internally? Was it scrutinised by the routine auditors during Ms O'Keeffe's time as CFO?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

All I can tell the Deputy is my recollections. It was in the profit and loss account. It was reflected in revenue with regard to the airtime that was sold under barter trading. The associated expense and cost of the services that were bought were also reflected in the cost. The cash that we received from it was reflected in our bank account. The way barter trading operates is that the barter agent says-----

Is Ms O'Keeffe-----

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

It is important to-----

Is Ms O'Keeffe a member of a professional accountancy body?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I am.

So Ms O'Keeffe understands accountancy practices.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I do.

Ms O'Keeffe understands the need to record accurately income and expenditure.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

Yes.

Why were the barter accounts off balance sheet? Did the routine auditors have access to them? We have heard from the chairs-----

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

The auditors-----

-----of both boards that they were not aware they were in existence.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

The revenue was booked through the landmark sale system. It had to be in order to get on air. If it was on the landmark sale system, it was part of revenue. If it was part of revenue it was part of monthly management accounts. If it was part of the monthly management accounts it was in the annual accounts, which were subject to audit. I do not have access to records-----

I am not asking for details. I am just asking for the process. When Ms O'Keeffe was actually the CFO of RTÉ how were the barter accounts managed? Again, I am not looking for transactions I am looking for-----

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

How were they managed? Per my recollection - I am going off memory and I have not access to people or to records - they were recorded as revenue and the related element of costs in the profit and loss account.

When Ms O'Keeffe handed over to her successor did she discuss the barter accounts with Mr. Collins?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

No I did not.

Did Ms O'Keeffe not think that was a central issue in the financial controls relating to the commercial department?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

No frankly.

So Ms O'Keeffe is admitting that-----

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

Total revenue was around €180 million when I left. The barter element was about €300,000 - from memory - on average. I cannot recall discussing it.

So €300,000 that was trading through the barter account was insignificant for Ms O'Keeffe.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

No-----

Ms O'Leary talked about €150,000 traded through the barter account from 2012 to 2022. When Mr. Collins took over as CFO he outlined that the barter account was taking in excess of €500,000 into the barter account. Ms O'Keeffe never mentioned to Mr. Collins when she handed over her role as CFO that there were accounts that were off-balance sheet and which were done to support the commercial department for hospitality and events.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

That was not how it was. That is a misrepresentation by the Deputy. My recollection was that we accounted for it as revenue and for costs.

Mr. Collins-----

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I believe that Mr. Collins brought the liability onto the balance sheet.

Will Mr. Collins explain the whole process around the operation of the barter account?

Mr. Richard Collins

I just confirmed the barter account. Let me add a bit of colour to this now. In 2019 the barter account was not accounted for in the accounts in the management accounts or anywhere. It was only at year end that it was brought on.

This was in 2020.

Mr. Richard Collins

Yes, in March 2020 for the 2019 accounts. There was a reorganisation in RTÉ in 2018 and divisions changed. Previously it was television and radio division, I think. It was before my time. I am not sure what happened. The commercial department was only created in 2018. I cannot comment on before my time. All I know is from the 2019 accounts what happened.

To interject, is there some final comment Ms O'Keeffe wishes to make on this?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

No. I am basing this on my recollections. I do not have access to records. I do not have access to people to-----

Chair, it is obvious the executives were working in silos. We have heard that again in relation to the accountability and the transparency around the barter accounts.

What I am hearing as well is the auditors missed this. I heard the implication the auditors somehow missed this. Ms O'Keeffe put it in there and they did not see it. That is what I just heard in this discussion. It was an excellent line of questioning from Deputy Dillon, but that is what I took from that conversation. Would our guests like to elaborate on that, because that may be what people looking in are thinking too, as well as the auditors?

Who were the routine auditors during Ms O'Keeffe's tenure as CFO?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

KPMG was our auditor up until 2017. Deloitte took over in 2018.

Okay. That concludes that piece.

It comes to me now. I appreciate we are hours into this and our guests are probably exhausted, so I will try to be as short as possible. If Mr. Coveney does not mind I would like to go back to the toy show musical. I appreciate it is difficult and that he put his hand up and said it was not the success RTÉ had hoped it would be. I want to explore the planning for it a bit more. We all know the convention centre is a very expensive venue to hire in the first place. Was any consideration given to other venues within Dublin for this?

Mr. Rory Coveney

Yes. We looked at a couple of different venues. They were a similar size. We had discussions with the Bord Gáis Energy Theatre at one stage. It did not want to do it and we ended up in the convention centre. There are not that many venues in Dublin that are not owned by certain proprietors, so it is not that easy to just go and pick a theatre. Ms Doherty might be able to give more insight into that. We ended up in the convention centre and we felt it was the right size for the type of show we wanted to put on, but obviously we were incorrect.

When the creative team was planning this and all the rest, was any consideration given to the impact this might have on the more traditional pantos and musicals we have all been going to for years as kids and parents? Was there any consideration of the commercial impact that might have on them?

Mr. Rory Coveney

We set out to create an alternative to the big Broadway shows that were coming to Dublin, the international shows that were coming to the Bord Gáis. We set out to create something of that scale, size and ambition in Dublin that was about Ireland, about our culture, about our communities, rooted in the biggest TV property we have which is the toy show, with children front and centre in it and create something new and unique. Pantos are a different business. It is a different market. As I said, were trying to compete with big international shows. I think Beauty and the Beast was on. It was about trying to create something of that scale and ambition.

Okay, but to answer my question, was any consideration given to the timing? I was at it by the way, but it obviously clashed with a lot of pantos and musicals around the city centre. I remember there was much discussion in the public domain at the time about the impact this was having on the livelihoods of artists, creators, makers and producers who have been at this for years.

Mr. Rory Coveney

Just to say, we employed about 100 people during the show. We employed a lot of those same people. We had a cast of 34 children and 16 adults. We had a whole team of technicians and musicians.

But they obviously came from somewhere else. RTÉ was just displacing them.

Mr. Rory Coveney

No, they were all Irish, virtually. There were a few international ones but most of them were Irish.

No, what I mean is they must have come from other theatre sets or crews or whatever. RTÉ was displacing something else to put this on.

Mr. Rory Coveney

Yes, but bear in mind that at the time we were coming out of Covid. A lot of these professionals had not worked for a couple of years at this stage and were hugely grateful to be given an opportunity to work on something of this ambition and scale in Dublin, which is pretty rare.

I will go back to my question. Was there any consideration given to the impact this might have on the creative industries already in place? Mr. Coveney will say this was a musical, but we all attend the pantos at Christmastime and in the new year. Was there any consideration given to the impact?

Mr. Rory Coveney

If I am honest a Chathaoirligh, of course we would have considered what the competition would be, but ultimately we thought this was additive, that it was adding to the creative sector and adding to the opportunities for all the talent that was involved. Dublin is a big city. There were lots of shows on. Everyone is competing for audiences.

Did you not think to yourself perhaps there is enough of this?

Mr. Rory Coveney

Pardon?

Did you never think to yourself or was it never discussed that there is enough of this happening already and you were just duplicating-----

Mr. Rory Coveney

I think it is very different. It depends on your perspective whether this is the same as panto or not. This was a very different production to a pantomime. The timing in one sense is dictated by the toy show. The story was about the toy show. If we are ever bringing this back there is consideration about timing as to whether we go before the toy show rather than after it.

If you were to run it again would you still do it in the convention centre?

Mr. Rory Coveney

No, we would go for a smaller theatre if we were doing it again. One of the problems we had with the size of the theatre is we could not get it to sell out and we could not build momentum, we could not build scarcity and we could not build excitement around a demand.

How then did you get rid of 9,000 free tickets?

Mr. Rory Coveney

We had a whole series of outreach opportunities. We had a toy show appeal with families and guests from all over the country as a charity night. We did an initiative with the ten DEIS schools in the Dublin 1 and Dublin 2 area. About 1,600 kids gained through that. We had all those contractual obligations, so all the cast and crew and their families, and we did a special on Christmas Eve with Ukrainian families.

Does Mr. Coveney agree they are eye-watering numbers to think of? I say that as someone who worked in a much smaller theatre. The idea 9,000 bums on seats were free is an eye-watering figure. It is almost the same as the number of people who paid for tickets.

Mr. Rory Coveney

In fairness, it looks worse because of what happened. We had a huge number of sales, as I said, namely, 6,700 on the big weekend that got cancelled. That was probably our last chance to kick into momentum into Christmas and we lost all momentum. Not only did we lose positive sentiment, we had active negative sentiment given people had travelled from the country and so on and we had to cancel shows at very late notice. That is when the project really took a turn and we lost a lot of demand then into the two Christmas weeks.

To be honest, if you raise your hand and say this did not work out and we will not be doing it again people could accept that better, but there has been a lot of discussion and maybe-----

Mr. Rory Coveney

I am sorry a Chathaoirligh, we have not made a definitive decision on whether we will do it again. We have created something and we have real creative assets and intellectual property, IP. We have songs, we have beautiful music, we have story and we have a set. I am not saying it will be the same again, but there are a lot of assets that could be repurposed and reused again that have value.

What did Mr. Coveney mean by the comment he made that there was no material difference to those type of losses to RTÉ?

Mr. Rory Coveney

They were netted off in our accounts. Our end-of-year accounts that will be published soon will capture that. I am not saying-----

I ask Mr. Coveney to put it in another way. Does he think the staff who have been out very vocally and publicly saying they could not get crews to go here and there and that they were working with broken equipment and so on would agree with that comment?

Mr. Rory Coveney

What I would say to that is we have to try things.

I totally appreciate that-----

Mr. Rory Coveney

No, I mean-----

-----but to say €2.2 million made no material difference to RTÉ-----

Mr. Rory Coveney

Ah look------

-----I have to categorically disagree with you on that.

Mr. Rory Coveney

Of course it made a difference. I am saying we have to try new things. We have to diversify our commercial incomes. We have to take risks. We are in a declining advertising market. Unless we can generate new businesses and new ideas from our talent and our staff-----

Okay. I have a final question for you, Mr. Coveney. My colleague, Deputy Christopher O'Sullivan, has alluded to it. Ryan Tubridy was not involved, but was he supportive of the idea.?

Mr. Rory Coveney

Yeah, he was supportive. Yes he was.

Okay. Thank you.

I am now going to ask Mr. Lynch to talk us through the process. Ryan Tubridy has said his goodbyes and we are moving onto a new phase for "The Late Late Show". Will Mr. Lynch talk us through the process of deciding who the host should be?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Yes. In terms of that process, there was a longlist and then a shorter list.

Did they apply or how did that come about?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

No. That is literally a list of people who could be suitable, so there is no-----

Okay. Who draws up that list?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

That is drawn up by the director of content.

It is by the director of content. How many names were on that list?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

There were approximately 20 names on the long list.

Would those 20 people have been aware that there names were on the list as potential hosts of "The Late Late Show"?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Not necessarily. Some would have done, but not many. Actually, hardly any at all.

Would entertainers and people in that business have been in a position to apply and demonstrate their interest in that position?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

No. It was not an open application. Given the size of the show and everything like that, significant broadcasting experience was needed to carry it. It was not an open call.

If anyone did declare to RTÉ that they were interested in that position, would they have got any information or feedback as to why they had not been considered?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

No, because it was not an open process with formal feedback, such as you might have in the case of, for example, commissioning programmes. For that, an entire commissioning system is set up and the programme-----

Just to finish off on that piece, what we are saying is it is a list of roughly 20 names, and that list is drawn up by the head of content.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Correct.

Okay, from where does it go? Does it go across the executive to make that ultimate decision? How is that decision made?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

The director of content is responsible for the editorial output from the content division. The director of news and current affairs is responsible for the output from news and current affairs. It is their decision, in tandem with the director general.

We as a committee have asked questions around Mr. Kielty's contract. We have been furnished with some details around that. Will the person, and I do not know who that is, the professional who directed the "The Late Late Show" previously continue in that role for the next phase of "The Late Late Show"?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

That does not sit within my division, but what I do know and it is my understanding, and I do not know if they have confirmed it, is that a certain individual who has worked with Mr. Kielty before will be directing that. The individual who directed Ryan Tubridy last year is doing a set of other things. One is a key event that we are doing-----

We are saying that whoever directed "The Late Late Show" in the past, their services are no longer required. We are bringing in a new director, along with Patrick Kielty, to direct the new version of "The Late Late Show". Am I right?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

That is correct. Just to explain, the person-----

Can I just move on, because I have such a short time? I hope Mr. Lynch can appreciate that.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Okay. Sorry.

That person will obviously incur new costs. Is that a contractual arrangement?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

In terms of multi-camera direction, and particularly in the late night entertainment, LNE, shows, there is a limited pool, because in Ireland we do not do that many of those types of shows. For example, for something like "Dancing with the Stars", there is a UK a director who comes in to do that who has the necessary skill set to deliver something as complex. We have a brilliant director, who is an RTÉ staff member, who is going on to do a significant cultural event we are doing with the Government to close the decade of centenaries, so he is going off-----

Were they happy to be leaving "The Late Late Show"?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I have never had a conversation with that individual. I know that the job and project they are taking on is incredibly exciting and they are the perfect person for it.

Okay. Ms Doherty spoke about being on the corridors of RTÉ. Did she ever hear the comment that Noel Kelly was the real director general around RTÉ?

Ms Moya Doherty

I did not ever hear that comment until I saw it written recently, and I do not believe it to be true. His role in representing agents is clear. The importance he has been given is maybe extreme. The negotiating process could have been more robust on the part of RTÉ. How and ever, and I think this is important to say, because the Cathaoirleach was raising it and it related to what Mr. Lynch and Mr. Coveney were saying, not everybody can do the job that is required. There is such a thing called charisma and there is such a thing called-----

Which job does Ms Doherty mean?

Ms Moya Doherty

A job as presenter within RTÉ. In a world of dual funding public service media, the audience follows the people they like. Then the advertisers follow the audience.

Can I bring Ms Doherty back to the Noel Kelly piece? There is a certain perspective, rightly or wrongly, that in terms of Noel Kelly's influence on all of the entertainers and many of the presenters within RTÉ, he wielded too much influence, let us say.

Ms Moya Doherty

I really do not know anything about the influence he yielded other than he represented individuals and clearly represented them very well.

Would Ms Doherty say that has been to the detriment of RTÉ in terms of what it has cost it?

Ms Moya Doherty

I believe, and this is probably going to go contrary to most people's views, that people who have talent and charisma, if they so choose, are entitled to representation. How and ever-----

I am going to go back to my question. Does Ms Doherty think that, in the case of our public service broadcaster, it has been to the detriment of RTÉ that one particular contractor has so many of the top presenters that RTÉ has-----

Ms Moya Doherty

Absolutely. It is not as it should be.

I thank Ms Doherty. I have just one request, more than anything else, for Ms O'Leary, which is around Soho House. That is because that is new information we received late last night. Will Ms O'Leary furnish the committee with a full inventory of who would have been in Soho House and what meetings were held there since 2019 and since the contract was renewed? Is that okay?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

Certainly.

That brings an end to my line of questions. I thank the representatives very much for their co-operation today. I know it has been not just been a difficult day; it has been a difficult couple of weeks. I hope the witnesses feel they have been treated fairly and respectfully at all times. It has been my utmost priority to do that for everybody. I will now open the floor to a few colleagues who are not generally members of this committee, but who have a keen interest in matters pertaining to RTÉ. Before I hand over to colleagues, I have one request. I have to leave the Chair for a short time, but I will be back. In my absence, I ask Deputy Griffin to take the chair.

Deputy Brendan Griffin took the Chair.

Deputy Boyd Barrett has been here since 1.30 p.m., so the Deputy has the floor.

I thank the committee for allowing me to come in on the discussion. I thank the ARC and all our contributors. I have some questions that may be a bit more detailed, but I have a couple of initial general questions and observations. First, the victims of this mess, and it is a mess, are the TV licence-paying public, who can go to jail if they do not pay their TV licence, and the vast majority of the RTÉ staff, who do not enjoy staggering salaries and who have often had to endure pay cuts, pay freezes, lack of resources and so on. On that second group, given that there has been an acknowledgement by the witnesses that this is a mess, that some big mistakes have been made here, and that something has to be done to reform RTÉ to protect public service broadcasting, have the representatives engaged with the elected representatives of the staff since all of this blew up to get their opinions and thoughts on what has happened? My understanding is that has not really happened on any sort of formal level. They are out protesting. They are very worried and they are very angry. As a matter of urgency, the executive and the board need to listen to the workers and the staff in there, who are victims of this, regarding what is happening to them and to listen to their ideas about what needs to change in RTÉ.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Since last Thursday, things have been very dynamic on a whole set of levels. We have been very focused on trying to bring information to the House to prepare for this, but we will immediately engage with those representative groups about having engagement and input from the staff - 100%.

I am firmly of the view, and the witnesses are alluding to it, that where commercial and advertising are concerned, there is a tension between them and the public service mandate. I will go further than the witnesses may be willing to - if they want to comment on it, please do - and say that it is a malign influence that seriously threatens to undermine the integrity of public service broadcasting, and this mess is evidence of that.

We need to look at the funding model. If there is not a proper funding model, RTÉ gets forced into doing this. The Government has to be held to account for forcing the institution into relying on commercial and advertising, which inevitably bring RTÉ into murky waters where it has to wine and dine corporate executives to get advertising and revenue. That opens up the possibility of the sorts of thing that are now infuriating people, namely, accounts paying for trips, flip-flops, parties or whatever. Would the witnesses like to comment on this?

I acknowledge that we need to face up to this issue but it does not fully explain the specifics of why we are here, or does it? I put it to Mr. Lynch or Ms Ní Raghallaigh last week that this looked like organised deceit and they acknowledged that it was. If it was, then someone organised it. It is still not clear who exactly organised that. Does Mr.Lynch agree that the staff, the public and the Oireachtas need to know who organised this deceit? Does he still stand over the idea that what we are dealing with and what is at the heart of this situation is organised deceit?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

It is good to distil it down to the issue. The issue is the three payments that have been made to Ryan Tubridy directly from RTÉ that should have been declared when these numbers were laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas and the public.

The chair has already alluded to it in terms of the relationship between commercial and public service and the way RTÉ is structured, but our revenue is €200 million from the licence fee and €149 million from commercial. That is not insubstantial. The Future of Media Commission forensically examined models of public service across Europe. One can see that the vast majority of public service broadcasters in Europe are 100% funded through some mechanic and they do not have this level of advertising. For example, a company like the BBC has the licence fee while BBC Studios, which is at arm’s length from the company, generates approximately £1.2 billion from international sales.

It does, to respond to the Chair's earlier comment, raise questions about how public service media should be funded. Through all of the debate and noise around the three payments that have been made, the only piece of light is the recognition by the Houses of the importance of public service media and that it should be correctly funded so that it can achieve its objectives with no, as the Deputy said, “malign influence”. I am not saying that commercial is a malign influence but there needs to be a clarity and transparency to it.

Would Mr. Lynch also say that the quid pro quo for the funding that could restore the integrity of public service broadcasting and deal with the tension by eliminating it, which is what needs to happen, is to address the other matter that does not sit well with people and is infuriating them in all of this, namely, the staggeringly high salary levels of an ultimately small, but fairly significant, minority of people at the top, including presenters, executives, board members and managers? I will put my question directly to Ms Doherty. She spoke about presenters having charisma and so on. How should I put this? Of course, they are an important part of the process but I seriously question the sharp distinction between a group who are the “talent” and everyone else who makes the programmes. I put this question to the executive as well. Do we not need to deal with that? It feeds into the notion that some people have to get extortionate salaries when everyone else, who is every bit as important in putting those shows together and often comes up with the ideas behind the shows, including researchers, sound people, camera people and all sorts of others as opposed to just the people at the front-----

Ms Moya Doherty

I agree entirely with the Deputy. I went into that organisation as a typist. I was a broadcasting assistant, a production assistant, a small-time presenter and I ended as a producer-director. I was never on a high salary. I worked with people who were on very high salaries. I never wanted to be a manager; I wanted to stay within production.

Regarding the tension the Deputy rightly mentioned, we must not forget that the entire ecosystem has changed. This is not the way things were 20 years ago when the huge salaries were agreed and there was competition out there. It is difficult to get those salaries back. As the organisation said, they were reduced by 30% and then by a further 15%. That is a 45% saving in all but there was one salary where we know we did not get that saving because there was a clandestine arrangement.

It is absolutely time. If any good is to come of this, it is that all you leaders and representatives around this table will lead the way in a proper debate and make a public service media that is fit for purpose in the 21st century so that we never have these conversations again and people can feel properly remunerated, fairly treated and that their voices are heard.

I do not know whether anyone else wishes to comment on my question but I believe that means salary caps and reducing salaries at the top level much further. I have to be honest with the witnesses on that because it infuriates people.

May I ask a few final questions?

I have just a couple of questions. A register of interests for, I believe, people on air was mentioned. Could I suggest that there should be a register of interests for everyone, including board and executive members? Even if someone is not on air, he or she can have significant influence over the expenditure of public moneys and, therefore, the question of conflicts of interest is important. Interests need to be registered and people need to acknowledge whether there are potential conflicts so that they can be seen transparently.

Ms Ní Raghallaigh may be aware of the questions I have been raising about issues in the film industry. We have heard from RTÉ workers of some poor employment conditions, for example, buy-out contracts for actors, writers and performers, the use of successive fixed-term contracts, bogus self-employment and so on. There are allegations within the wider film and audiovisual sector that the same things are happening there. Equity is waging a campaign and film crew have raised this matter. RTÉ is involved, as €40 million every year goes into drama and independent productions. I want to see that money going there, but if we look honestly in the aftermath of this, do questions now arise about similar disparities between people at the very top getting high producer fees and people on fairly poor conditions of remuneration, not getting their royalties and so on? Do these disparities now need to be examined seriously and acknowledged?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

As a former producer, I will make a point. We engage with Screen Producers Ireland. With some exceptions, producers or company owners that work in the television sector do not tend to be the ones who make significant profits.

Running production companies is very difficult. It is economically challenging. People sacrifice a huge amount to make documentary films, dramas and low-budget independent films. The idea that there is an elite within the industry and then normal workers is just not true in my experience.

I am sure that is true for the vast majority. It is the case, however, certainly, from my knowledge of it, that a relatively small number of producers get the bulk of public financial support through various mechanisms. If that is not true, fine. Those in Equity are saying that they are being forced to sign buyout contracts both within RTÉ and in respect of productions funded by public money and that there is abuse of fixed-term workers legislation in the film industry. We have obviously heard about bogus self-employment. It has also been stated that in some cases there are extortionate producer fees at the top. Is Mr. Lynch saying that is not happening at all?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I am not that familiar with deals in the film industry. I know, in the main, that most company owners are actually living from hand to mouth. Obviously, the industry has changed significantly. If you look at producers who working for streaming companies, they will only get the contract with them if they have a buyout. It is like a cost-plus model rather than a royalty model. That is what the writers' strike in the United States at the moment is about.

I am conscious that we have now been here for five hours and that there are about four - there may be others - who will return and who will want to ask questions. I propose that we keep the questions fairly short in light of the length of time we have been here. Does people need a break or do they want to keep running to the end? If anyone wants or needs a break, they should be allowed to have it. If that is fair enough, we will run on. We will try to be as quick as possible.

The next three speaking slots will go to Senator Conway, Deputy O'Connor and Senator Murphy. I ask them to limit themselves to three minutes, please. We need to be conscious of time.

I am also very conscious that the witnesses have been here for a long time. As I am not a member of the committee, I had to wait until the very end to engage. I will start on a positive note. I was quite impressed with the length, detail and breadth of Ms O'Keeffe's opening statement given that she does not have access to documents, personnel and so on. That is quite refreshing from our perspective. I ask her to outline why she left RTÉ.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I was in the organisation for 18 years. At the time I felt had not planned to spend that long in RTÉ and I decided it was time to go.

There was no other reason; it was just that Ms O'Keeffe wanted to move on.

Noel Kelly appears to have become very successful through his engagement on behalf of top talent within RTÉ. From Ms O'Keeffe's recollection, has Noel Kelly Management received any direct payments from RTÉ directly or was it all through representing clients?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

I have no recollection of Noel Kelly receiving any direct payments other than for his representation of-----

Did any agents other than Noel Kelly represent clients or was he effectively exclusive?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

There were other agents and representatives for talent.

There has been a lot of talk about the contracts. Regarding the evaluation of these top talent contracts, are there any examples where these contracts were terminated prematurely because of lack of performance? Was there any payback to RTÉ in terms of any of these contracts? In the event that top talent got sick, were their contracts still honoured? Were there any out clauses for that? Have significant sums of money been paid to terminate contracts for talent that did not work out? Were all these contracts fulfilled in full? If they were not, were they paid out in full? The deputy director general may address that.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

That is one I will need to take away to check. I will do that and come back to the committee.

With respect, there is not a huge number involved. We are talking about perhaps 18 or 20 people. Surely to God Mr. Lynch would know if any such contracts were terminated prematurely?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

If the Senator is talking about that small group of people, I am not aware of any contract that has been terminated prematurely. However, let me double-check just to be sure for the record.

Mr. Lynch might come back to the committee on that. What evaluation takes place for the contract performance of these top talent people? What metrics does RTÉ use for evaluating whether they are worth the money and whether they have delivered their side of the bargain when renewing their contracts? While I accept there were negotiations, there does not seem to be any scenario where contracts were not renewed.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

There is a set of considerations that go into that in terms of the services they are delivering. Obviously, the audiences they are garnering would also be a key part of the consideration in terms of what sort of relevance and impact the broadcasting they are doing is having with the Irish public.

I am conscious of time, but I have one other question.

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

May I come back?

Ms Breda O'Keeffe

The Senator asked me why I left RTÉ. I had been there for 18 years. I also left under a voluntary restructuring programme at the time. I just wanted to make that clear. At the time, there was an offer in place, a restructuring programme, with terms and conditions for staff. I applied under that scheme.

I have one final question. Regarding the barter account or any other account, were any personal loans made available to any members of the senior management executive team or any of the top talent contractors? Were any advance payments made to top talent who found themselves in difficult financial situations where perhaps six months or 12 months of their agreed contract was paid in advance to assist them? The current head of finance might answer that.

Mr. Richard Collins

I am not aware of any such assurances.

Is Mr. Collins sure? Would he like to double-check and come back to the committee?

Mr. Richard Collins

I will check. We will come back to the committee on that. As I said, I am not aware off the top of my head, but I will check that.

Deputy Niamh Smyth resumed the Chair.

I thank Deputy Griffin for taking my seat for a while. Deputy O'Connor has three minutes.

Does RTÉ have a risk register? Okay. How often is it amended?

Mr. Robert Shortt

I think Ms Anne O'Leary was trying to get in there. I know it comes before the audit and risk committee at each of its meetings.

Ms Anne O'Leary

There is a risk register and it is looked at on a monthly basis at the audit and risk meetings.

Who takes charge of that risk register? Who on the executive board has responsibility for it?

Ms Anne O'Leary

That would be Mr. Coveney.

Mr. Rory Coveney

Just to say, different risks-----

Sorry. Obviously, there are items in these risk registers that would be of paramount importance. For an organisation the size and scale of RTÉ with the services it provides, I presume the No. 1 item on that would be reputational risk. Is that correct?

Ms Anne O'Leary

That is correct.

Mr. Rory Coveney

There is a mix of them. They are all quite close. There is operational staying on air. There is editorial risk. There is reputational risk.

Does RTÉ have them ranked?

Mr. Rory Coveney

They are all ranked quite closely.

However, are they ranked? Yes" or "No".

Mr. Rory Coveney

They are ranked.

Ms Anne O'Leary

Yes.

Mr. Rory Coveney

No. 1 is editorial, I think.

Where on that is reputational risk?

Mr. Rory Coveney

Reputation is quite close to the top. It would be No. 3 or No. 4.

Does Ms Anne O'Leary know which one it is?

Ms Anne O'Leary

Yes, it is No. 3.

Excellent. Who is in charge of item No. 3? Who is responsible?

Mr. Rory Coveney

As I said, the risks in the risk register are spread among different executive board members. Reputation falls in-----

Who on the executive board has responsibility for reputational damage or risk?

Mr. Rory Coveney

I think it falls under marketing if I am correct.

I want to move on to the internal and external auditors. RTÉ was in procurement for everything, I presume, when it comes to external and internal auditors.

Mr. Richard Collins

For external auditors, yes.

What about internal?

Mr. Richard Collins

For internal auditors, no. It is an employee of RTÉ.

It is a bit unusual, is it not?

Mr. Richard Collins

No, it would be usual to have an employee.

Obviously, the internal auditor has drawn up a number of reports. Is that correct?

Mr. Richard Collins

That is correct.

Is Mr. Collins going to commit, from a reputational perspective, to publishing all of those internal reports for this committee and the Committee of Public Accounts?

Mr. Richard Collins

The internal auditor reports to the audit and risk committee, ARC. He does not report to me. I think that is-----

Just to be very clear, it is all reports - everything.

Mr. Richard Collins

I cannot make that commitment. Anne O'Leary would have to come in on that.

Ms Anne O'Leary

I can. Of course, for all of the reports from internal audit that are available to audit and risk, I can make them available to the Deputy straight away.

That would be much appreciated. Does Ms. O'Leary have the authority to do that?

Ms Anne O'Leary

I do.

That is excellent. That would be very helpful, if Ms O'Leary does not mind doing so. How often does RTÉ rotate the accountancy firms that would carry out the external audit?

Ms Anne O'Leary

When I came in as audit and risk chair in 2014, I decided we would put a process together, so it went from KPMG to Deloitte. It is now coming up to the end of its five-year process, so I am sure we will do another evaluation and see whether we get a new external auditor.

Is it appropriate that those reports be released for the past ten years? Is it okay to get that?

Ms Anne O'Leary

Absolutely.

I think that would be very helpful from a restoration point of view. I have one other question. How many subcommittees does RTÉ have within the board in regard to its remuneration committee and its audit and risk committee? How many subcommittees exist within the board?

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

There is the audit and risk committee and the remuneration committee. We have a strategy committee, we temporarily had the DG selection committee, and we have programme, audience council and digital and technology.

Okay. My time has expired but I want to wrap up with this point. We have heard much this week about “going forward”, “a new direction of travel for RTÉ”, “a new culture”, and so on and so forth, and we have had very extensive debate. Above all else, RTÉ is about to bring in a new director general, and when I say “new”, I mean new to that role. He previously served within the RTÉ organisation for an extensive period of time, albeit perhaps not in regard to the financial roles within the organisation, and he would have been a member of the executive board because he was assistant director general carrying out Mr. Lynch's current role. Do the witnesses not see that as a bit of a contradiction in terms of establishing a new culture and a new pathway forward within RTÉ? I am not knocking Mr. Bakhurst but I think it is a very important question that needs to be answered.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

That is really one for the chair but I would say-----

If Mr. Lynch does not mind, I will put the question to the chair. That would be appreciated. I can come back to Mr. Lynch if time allows.

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

You might look at it in that way and you might look at it as an advantage. The incoming director general worked in the organisation and knows it extremely well. He has been away working for several years with Ofcom. I think his experience is invaluable to the organisation and that was the basis on which we chose this candidate for the job.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Mr. Bakhurst has had a series of very senior roles, including director of news at the BBC, where he led a lot of its digital transformation. He worked in RTÉ for three or four years, where he came in at a time of crisis and absolutely turned around the newsroom. He then moved as director of broadcast to Ofcom, which is a very serious UK regulator. In terms of governance, he was specifically responsible for the running of the BBC, in particular from a governance and reporting point of view and in terms of the expenditure of public moneys.

I have to move on. I call Senator Murphy.

I could not be here earlier today for personal reasons but I heard Geraldine O'Leary's comments earlier about the stress and mental health. From my perspective, I can see the pain on the faces of the witnesses last week and this week. I know they wish this had not happened. I would I hope that at all times when I ask questions, I am fair and upfront.

I will start with Mr. Coveney. In fairness to him, I initially brought up the issue about Toy Show The Musical and Mr. Coveney gave a direct answer saying it did not work out. That is fair enough. Things flop and things go well. It happened to me in life and it happens to a lot of people, if we are to be honest. Was the board continuously informed about the cost of the musical as it went along and it was seen that it was not going to be a success? Was Ryan Tubridy on board from the start? My information is he was not on board from the start. Mr. Coveney said last week it was his idea. Were other people involved who would have come to him with this idea?

Mr. Rory Coveney

On the costs, the Senator will see from the numbers we released today that it actually came in under cost. The problem was revenues, not costs. Yes, we would have had meetings every week with finance on costs and I would have kept the director general in particular abreast of how that was going.

With regard to Ryan, he is perfectly entitled to take a view on a project. He was asked and consulted by the two producers of the musical, who were the producers of “The Late Late Show” at the time, and they had various conversations with him. He did not want to be part of it but he was supportive of them.

Basically, Ryan Tubridy and Noel Kelly were not involved in this project.

Mr. Rory Coveney

No.

That is fair enough. It was the idea of the two producers of “The Late Late Toy Show”.

Mr. Rory Coveney

They came up with the original concept.

That is fair enough. I just wanted to clarify that.

With regard to the car issue, I am sorry to bring this up again and Mr. Lynch might deal with this as I do not want to bring everybody in on it because time is limited, from what I picked up when listening to the debate, Mr. Lynch stated today there was one secret car deal. Is he absolutely satisfied on that? Let us be truthful here. I can see a marked difference in the way the witnesses have been answering questions today and I give them credit for that. I can tell them that from the public perspective, if they answer the questions directly, honestly and straight, the public will give them credit for it. Can we be absolutely clear? Mr. Lynch said there was one secret car deal and he said the car has been handed back this week and there is no other secret car deal. Are there more secret car deals? Let us be honest about it.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I will be totally honest. The information is still coming in because it is a staff of 1,800 people. I will be looking at everything and I will share it once I have it compiled. Then, obviously, in all of this, we need to talk to the individuals, find out the circumstances and find out if there was approval or not. I will come back to the committee with all of that information.

That is fair enough. It is not just one secret car deal. Mr. Lynch is obviously holding on that at the moment but there may be more. Am I correct in that?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

It is possible.

That information will come to us as quickly as possible.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

That is correct.

I have a question for Mr. Lynch and Mr. Shortt. On the basis that Áine Lawlor, Mary Wilson, Darragh Maloney, George Lee and maybe one or two more employees of RTÉ have publicly stated their salaries, do the witnesses not think it would be a good idea for some of the rest to voluntarily give that information, given their colleagues have done it?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

It is an individual decision.

Would Mr. Lynch like them to consider it?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I would say it is an individual decision for each individual. Some individuals come forward. It is an individual decision.

In terms of the public view, I mixed with a lot of people over the weekend. People who have come out and made public their salary, because it is public money, are being well respected by the public. I have the same question for Mr. Shortt, although I do not want to labour it. He is a journalist himself.

Mr. Robert Shortt

I have no problem telling the Senator my salary if he wants that.

Not Mr. Shortt personally.

Mr. Robert Shortt

The Senator raised it and I have no problem in telling him.

This is on the basis that Mr. Shortt's colleagues, George Lee, Bryan Dobson, Mary Wilson, Darragh Maloney and Áine Lawlor have voluntarily come out and said what is their salary. Would Mr. Shortt like to see more of his employee colleagues doing that?

Mr. Robert Shortt

I think it is entirely up to them. It is a personal decision. My own view is that most of us are on union-negotiated salary grades and I do not have a problem making that public.

Okay. Again, in regard to what most people would see as the high rate of salaries, we would all be aware of the campaign by RTÉ to seek a licence fee increase and to seek more money. Do the witnesses not think it was extraordinary that RTÉ would still continue to pay this high level of salaries? The witnesses can make the assumption, or they may actually have said to us, that RTÉ reduced salaries along the route.

That is fair enough. If you look back at the late Gay Byrne’s time, Pat Kenny’s time and now Ryan Tubridy, of course there is a big difference in salary. Do you not think, as you continue to press for more from the public purse, that it was very unwise to be paying such big salaries to a certain group of people?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Because there was some mention of salary caps, in a way, the market in Ireland has changed and shifted significantly and therefore it is the market that will decide.

I will just make a comment because I know the Chair is under pressure. I will go back to what I said last week and I do not expect any of the panel to answer this. The Minister with responsibility for communications in 2002 recently wrote an article in the Irish Daily Mail - I am going to differ with Moya a little on this - about 20 years ago. In that article - the witnesses can look it up - he said that on the first day of that job, he and the then Taoiseach met with the then director general and I think head of television, who was Cathal Goan, and he said that the running of the organisation at that time was shambolic. He also referred to the fact that there were 11 employees on the payroll who were no longer in RTÉ. We have to back as far as 2002 because perhaps you are getting some of the blame for bad old practices that have been there for years. At that time, something that was very unpopular with the general public was the big increase in the licence fee, which RTÉ got. However, things have not changed. This is my point; 21 years on things have not changed.

I want to see RTÉ survive. I spent 20 years in production and presentation. I love media and I love radio in particular. I think RTÉ does a lot of good work. It has some fantastic presenters who do a lot of good work and that is acknowledged. We do not want this to fall.

I will say one final thing that might not be the most popular thing to say to people - pay your TV licence. I do not want a situation where €200 million of revenue goes out the door and, because of that, some of the employees, particularly on the lower scale, find out that they have no jobs.

Cathaoirleach, I omitted to ask one very specific question.

One second. Deputy Cathal Crowe just came into the room and his name was on the list.

Go ahead. Let me catch my breath-----

No, one second. When Deputy Crowe has asked his three minutes - I have to consider the witnesses must be exhausted and we have gone way over the time-----

(Interruptions).

Hang on two seconds. I ask Deputy Crowe to use his three minutes. I will then go around the room. I am mindful of the fact that there are members of this committee who have been here all day and every day and may have one final question or comment. I will not ask the witnesses to respond to every single one of them. After Deputy Crowe, we will go around the room and members may ask a question or make a comment in 30 seconds or one minute. If the witnesses want to make a further final comment or observation, they are welcome to do that, by all means, but I am sure they are exhausted, so they do not have to.

The Chair talking there allowed me to catch my breath - I am after running down the street. I have been following this debate. I am not usually a member of this committee but I have an interest. This is a national story that the whole country is concerned about but also it matters in my locality because we have Lyric FM headquartered down the road from us in Limerick city. Many Clare and Limerick people who are working there feel utterly let down because the time that they were told there was no money and they would have to shut down is exactly concurrent with the time when barter accounts, bonus payments, talent payments – all of this fiasco – was going on.

My first question is for all the witnesses. What is your escape strategy? How do you get out of this? What we read overnight added volumes to the fiasco. How do you get out of this? The speculation-----

To whom is Deputy Crowe directing his question?

Mr. Lynch, please.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

We welcome both the Government reviews, which will go on for a period of six months with respect to culture, governance and contractors. We are co-operating fully with the investigations that are currently under way, particularly in terms of Grant Thornton, whose remit will be extended. These are key pieces of work that are now being undertaken and we are co-operating with that. As of Monday, the new director general will be in office. We are working closely with him. Prior to this - the chair can speak to this – he was keen to do a significant review of all practices within the organisation.

In the past week, Mr. Lynch caught his own breath and I am sure he had meetings to see how to prepare for today. Did he at any time chat with Mr. Tubridy in the past week?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

No.

Were there any contract talks ongoing in the past week while the fiasco was unfolding?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

No.

I refer to the Lyric FM issue, and there are many more examples. RTÉ staff are speaking to us. It is a pretty broad organisation. We are repeatedly told of the projects that could not happen and were axed, or people who had other pay claims and felt they were being underpaid and their claims were also axed. Would Mr. Lynch be able to quantify today or in writing to this committee, in that 2019 to 2023 period, how many projects were cut, axed, dropped or underfunded concurrent with this period of opulence for some?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

I am happy to supply that information. By projects, is the Deputy talking about projects the-----

Productions, equipment and capital works that might have been cut back on - even the shedding of staff. That has not come out yet but I am sure there have been workforce losses and people retired and were not replaced. I want to see a quantification of that. That is really what galls your workers and your colleagues. At a time of opulence for some, it was sauce for the few and crumbs for the many. That is really how it appears.

Mr. Lynch made an editorial decision in the past fortnight to pull Ryan Tubridy from air. I asked this question last week and Mr. Lynch has taken on an editorial role here. What has changed or has anything changed? Is he off the airwaves indefinitely? What can the public expect?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

In terms of-----

Is he finished with RTÉ?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

If I can answer, at this point, Ryan Tubridy will not be on air next week. That is continuing. Again, we have a legal obligation with regard to Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, BAI, codes and so on in respect of our independence and impartiality. We have to – we are obliged to – obey the law in that regard.

Please conclude Deputy.

To conclude, I was a schoolteacher for many years. Kids, when they were in trouble, would often come to us at the classroom door quite upset. However, when you stop and think about it, they were upset at being caught and in trouble; they were not really upset for what they had done. When I hear of cars being returned yesterday and things like that, it does not smack of sincerity.

I will go around the room because I know that colleagues have one final question. As I said, witnesses do not have to answer them all. We will do a quickfire question or comment around the room, starting with Senator Carrigy, who has 30 seconds.

I have two questions. Is the internal auditor who did not highlight anything still in the role? Yes or no? Yes. They are still in the role despite over the years never having highlighted any issue that is now the cause of this.

Mr. Richard Collins

Sorry. I would not be blaming the internal auditor, but they are in their role, just to confirm that.

Their role is to highlight high, medium or low risk-----

Next question.

Regarding the car that was brought up, witnesses would not highlight what role the person had. Is anyone in this room the person who handed back the car this week? Perhaps you would ask people.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

No.

Mr. Robert Shortt

No.

Ms Anne O'Leary

No.

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

No

Mr. Richard Collins

No.

With regard to payments that are going to made to Ryan Tubridy under the oral contract, the witnesses might clarify what exactly the payments are. Does it include the contract that was engaged in in 2020 or is it a reduced contract? Could they give us some clarity on that?

I call Deputy Griffin. We will go around the room and then the witnesses will answer.

I remind the witnesses that we are looking for copies of the remuneration committee minutes going back to 2017. We are looking for details on the movie show pitch, the contract that was entered into around that and the car allowance details – as much as possible about who has what. I ask the chair of the audit and risk committee why the recommendation was that Dee Forbes’s resignation would be sought rather than, for example, dismissal. Can she elaborate on that? How did the committee come to that conclusion rather than dismissal?

Does Senator Sherlock have a question or observation?

Apologies if this has been asked. Have Ryan Tubridy or Noel Kelly ever asked for the public record of Ryan Tubridy's earnings to be corrected?

Does Senator Dooley have a question or comment? He has 30 seconds.

Who signed the two payments that went to Mr. Kelly? Obviously a cheque was cut or a payment was made in some electronic format. Who signed that?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

The director general.

It was approved by just one signature?

Mr. Richard Collins

It was paid through the barter account so a barter company was instructed to make the payment. Sorry, to pay the invoice that was submitted by-----

That just required one signatory or one person to authorise. Is that correct?

Ms Geraldine O'Leary

The record was "instructed by director general". That is what was written in our internal report.

I want to ask one question and make one comment. My question is in regard to the motor vehicles. Are the witnesses aware that in all instances, benefit-in-kind would be paid on all of those transactions? The witnesses can come back to me with an answer

I want to make a general comment. In fairness to the witnesses here, this is the third day that they have come before Oireachtas committees and answered questions. We may not have been happy with all of the answers, but the sessions have been very lengthy. I realise we have asked tough questions. I have not been happy with some of our colleagues and the manner in which they phrased some of their questions. One can disagree with somebody but one can be respectful. I would hope that in my case and that of most of my colleagues and the regular attenders at this committee, people know that it is not our intention to be disrespectful. We want to get to the bottom of this and we do expect accountability and transparency. I want to make one other comment, which is crucial to the the hearings that are going to take place. We are due to have Ryan Tubridy and Noel Kelly before the committees next week. To the question about Ryan Tubridy not being on air, because of the hearings, Oireachtas TV will probably get higher viewership figures next week than some of RTÉ's programming. It is important that time is allocated and priority given to people who regularly attend this committee. I would hope that when we are debating the future of public sector broadcasting and some of the bigger picture issues, that we also have to address, that we will have the same level of interest in the debates that are going on here.

I come from a place east of Strokestown called Scramoge. A great thing happened there some years ago. Ours was the town that produced "Bosco", one of the greatest things RTÉ ever did. To this day the programme brings happiness to thousands of children. I know Deputy O'Sullivan talked about his close association with it yesterday but we are very proud of that in our town.

It was stated that Ryan Tubridy will be off work again next week. He has done some brilliant work outside of RTÉ, charity work and the like. Will he still remain on the payroll as long as he is off work?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

As we try to resolve this, yes he will.

I am mindful that the bell has sounded. I am not going to suspend. I ask Senator Byrne to take the Chair so that the witnesses can respond. Hopefully I will be back before the end. In the event that I am not, I want to thank the witnesses. I know it has been a particularly difficult day, never mind the two or three weeks that have gone before this. I thank Ms Anne O'Leary who has attended so diligently from far away. It is much appreciated. I thank the board, the former members and the former CFO. I really appreciate their input. It has been most helpful. It has been a different hearing entirely.

Senator Malcolm Byrne took the Chair

I will allow just a couple of minutes for any further questions. In terms of final comments, if any of the panel-----

We asked a number of rapid-fire questions and they are-----

I know. I am now going to ask for a response.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Sorry, what was the question?

We cannot ask all the questions again.

I asked about the oral contract with Ryan Tubridy.

I asked, in regard to Dee Forbes, why the recommendation was to seek resignation rather than dismissal.

Ms Anne O'Leary

It was my recommendation. To put her through a dismissal process, we would have to have done a HR investigation in a sub-committee. I thought seeking her resignation was more immediate because I thought that what I had found out from Deloitte and Grant Thornton was serious enough to merit it. That was my recommendation. It was up to the board to approve of that or not.

I want to address the agreement with Ryan Tubridy that Senator Conway asked about.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Obviously, the committee will hear from the agent next week. Television and radio services ceased from 31 May. There were negotiations about radio and they were suspended. It continues.

Is he still receiving the pro rata radio element of his contract?

Mr. Richard Collins

No, he is not. Negotiations were suspended so nothing has been paid.

The witnesses are saying that he is being paid at the moment.

Hang on Senator Conway. We went around for one round of questions.

This is important.

I appreciate that. In fairness to the witnesses, they have been here since half past one.

There is no payment being made. Is that correct?

Mr. Richard Collins

What I said was that no payment has been made in the last month.

Has Ryan Tubridy or Noel Kelly asked for the public record to be corrected at any time in terms of his published salary?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Not that I am aware of.

Can that be checked?

Mr. Adrian Lynch

Yes, of course.

I asked the question about benefit-in-kind in terms of any of the cars.

Mr. Adrian Lynch

That will be part of looking into this.

Okay, so we will get we get clarity on it. I am conscious of the time so I ask whether Ms Ni Raghallaigh wants to make any final remarks.

Ms Siún Ní Raghallaigh

This has been hard for everybody and I appreciate the comments today from a number of members in recognising that. I think we still have a big job of work to do. As I said in my statement, hopefully something comes out of this that gives us a more robust RTÉ and also that we address the public funding model for our public broadcasters. That is really what needs to happen here.

I thank the witnesses because I am conscious that it has been a long day. I also thank the clerk and the staff here and those who prepared the documentation. We are aware of the issue of Ryan Tubridy and Noel Kelly seeking to appear before the committee. There will be a private meeting of the committee to determine when that will go ahead. That concludes our business for today. The meeting is adjourned and the joint committee will next meet in private session at 10.30 a.m. on Friday, 7 July.

The joint committee adjourned at 7.08 p.m. sine die.
Top
Share