General Irish politics discussion thread

Not sure, auditors wouldn't generally delve into individual files much. I mean they really don't want to know 'too much'. Quite often similar approach with Board of Directors.

The story was leaked to the media though. Think it was the Indo that broke it first.

Sam, people knew that this barter account was being used to hide transactions. It wasn't some accident of nature waiting for the auditors to discover.

Who knows what the sequence was, but it is entirely possible that one of those who knew tipped somebody off...i.e. leaked to the media.

Agree fully with this. The problem happened because RTE were called in on a guarantee that nobody knew about. That led to problems with the audit that made it to the Audit and Risk Committee.

O'Leary, Head of Commercial,

Collins, Chief Financial Officer,

Coveney, Director of Strategy

Dee Forbes, CEO

all gone, with more to be stood aside.

I think most who listened to the evidence would agree with the above. Indisputable that those people were asleep at the wheel and that is why they are gone.

The government really need to take this opportunity to conduct root and branch reform of RTE.

No, that is wrong.

They have announced parallel reviews into the governance and culture that allowed this to happen and another into contractor fees, human resources, gender equality and inclusion.

What they must do is act on those reviews and reform, rather than let the dust settle. A great opportunity.

The same system that will see little to no actual accountability in RTE will allow those responsible for this ongoing fiasco off the hook too, no doubt.

Most of the exces have gone or are on the way out though aren't they? Or the seriously culpable ones anyway...

I do find it odd that the TDs we might expect would protect worker rights, i.e. the left TDs such as Labour and Sine Fein, are the ones wanting to see people sacked asap.

As far as I can see,(I only saw part of todays session) nothing has changed from the beginning of this process. RTE paid Ryan Tubridy under the table when at the same time telling us all staff were taking a paycut. And the evidence is that it was sanctioned by the DG. So fat, that DG had decided not to be available to answer any questions.

Personally , I am not impressed by the Chair of the Board. Over the past few weeks Lynch had answered most of the questions that i would have expected a chairperson to take. In particular she seemed unable to answer how the decision came about to sack the DG (DF) simply saying she was acting on the advice of A O'Leary. That is not good enough an answer from a chairperson. Surpirsed Martin hasn't sked her to stand down as she is not the person to lead a real change in RTE. In fact she seems to be stepping back and just letting Bakhurst take the lead. It appears, to me, that she is out of her depth.

The only error I felt Geraldine O'Leary made was to not ask questions of the DG when asked to pass the invoices through the barter account. ( I don't like the wining and dining aspect of RTE, but that was what she was employed to do) The CFO could have asked more questions , but would most people question a payment approved by the DG/CEO of your company. He admitted he should have asked more questions.

I am not too sure what Lynches role was before he became interim DG ( was he deputy DG?). He is clearly setting himself up as Bakhurst's number 2.

But what can we do about Verona Murphy TD?

The "left" should stand for the workers, in this case, the members of the Executive Board. They should also stand for due process, for fair procedures for dismissal. The "hang 'em high" mob on here from the start sound like they come from a fascist background, no matter their insistence on being of the left.

Might just reveal that SF is not really a left party, more a populist one.

Francie, I answered your question as truthfully as i could. And It was based on watching three weeks of committee sessions , not just soundbites.

Nowhere did I suggest that anyone should stand over fraud . not did I make any mention of whether you are left wind or not. i commented on Labour and Sine Fein TD's: both parties label themselves as left wing. So it is a shock when the first instinct of TD's from both parties is to look to sack people. As a long standing trade unionist I would expect fair procedure to apply, especially if people have come forward to answer questions to help get to the truth. There has been no evidence of fraud, Any incompetence was overseen by the DG, who is now departed. And while TDs were asking about the name of junior staff some of them were also wanting Mr Tubridy back on air.

But relating to the power , role and function of these committees :-

You might think that the committees questioning amounts to a good investigation. I don't and as it goes on it highlights the deficiencies in this type of examination . It is why, early on, I said it was good that we denied giving these committees more power. They are now going into examination of redundancy schemes . What do they hope to find? And how will that help write a report on the payments to Ryan Tubridy? What has the toy show musical to do with it? There are apparently three parties to the agreement under scrutiny, RTE, NKM/Tubridy and Renault. They are asking questions around what Renault knew and did not know from the other two parties. Why hasn't the MD of Renault been invited to give their version? Why hasn't the committee met to discuss a line of questioning and the questions that need to be answered to co-ordinate their examination? Why did the chair if PAC begin the process by attacking a witness ( Collins) because the chair didn't understand the sequence of events? Why do TDs consistently use the first few minutes of their time to grandstand and talk to their constituents and then complain they are running out of time? I wont call it a kangaroo court because there has been some good work done, especially by the Media committee , but it is constantly in danger of becoming one.

I think it is not in order that witnesses provide their documents to the PAC almost at the last minute.

Yesterday, Alan Kelly mentioned he was getting documentation from journalists over WhatsApp because said documentation was not provided by the witnesses beforehand.

There should be a legally binding deadline as to when the documents from the witnesses is available.

if the documents are not provided then reschedule the PAC meeting and introduce a financial penalty on the witnesses