Ms Sarah Keane:

Under the articles people were required to resign in writing. Therefore, most resignations were made outside board meetings and people had their own discussions about them. It was a very contentious time and a difficult time for all board members. If there was a lack of discussion at the time, in the six months after the Rio games there was nothing but robust discussion and debate at the table of the board.

I was also asked why we were not concerned about earlier issues. I have made reference to this matter previously, but I will take a little time to go into it in further detail.

At the time of the Rio games I had been a member of the board for just less than two years. I was one of 13 board members and attended about nine meetings in that period. The average time served by officers of the board at the time was 19 years. When I became involved, I knew that people felt change was needed at the Olympic Council of Ireland, particularly as the same people had been involved for a long time. There was concern that there was not enough of a partnership with the governing bodies and there was a lot of dictatorial stuff going on at Olympic events. I also knew that seeking change from the outside had not been successful over the years. Furthermore, I knew that change was unlikely to come easily or quickly, but, with others, I was determined to try and wanted to work with others to drive change from the inside. As Mr. Justice Moran concluded, the board did not have a questioning culture and culture is not something that is easy to change. Governance is not a tick-the-box exercise but about culture and behaviours, day in and day out. It is not easy to change something that has been in existence for a long time.

When I first joined the board, I did what most new board members do, that is, I listened, observed and sought to understand the organisation and its workings in order to form my own opinions from the inside. There were board meetings and agendas and information was circulated. Some discussions took place at the board table and, in time, I began to see things that concerned me, as did other board members, such as the partial attendance of the chief executive and the incomplete nature of the financial reporting, in respect of which the honorarium came to my attention. There was some questioning by me and others.

One of the things that became very clear in time was the operational nature of the board and, specifically, its officers. To a large extent, I can understand why this was the case. The OCI is a small organisation. With less than two years to go to the games, a huge amount of cover was required in terms of logistics, selection, kit and all of the factors that come with such a big event. There are only four staff members. We have compared the council to other European national Olympic councils and concluded we are completely under-resourced and understaffed. The average number of staff at other European national committees is 13. There was no doubt that several officers of the board were very operational. One of the officers was a chef de mission, while others were liaising directly with the national governing bodies on standards. Everybody was aware of this.

I know a lot about how boards work and felt the board should be less operational and more strategic. My own board, at Swim Ireland, was the first of all Irish sports organisations to adopt the voluntary code of governance. I understand change takes time. With less than two years to go to an Olympic Games, with everyone talking about the athletes, the priority of the organisation at the time was delivering for them, coaches and members. We had had no indication of any issue with ticketing. Besides, I knew that within a period of time, the president was going to stand down after the Rio games. I did feel there would be an opportunity for further change and that this might perhaps mean change could be accelerated. Several new board members were appointed in my time and I felt other new board directors might be appointed after the Rio games and that this would help to change the culture. I had to work with others to influence change in my organisation. Most of this does not happen fast, unless, of course, there is a crisis which is an opportunity for change. If, however, one is serious about reform, one has to stick with it. I was and remain completely committed to reform.

On ticketing contracts, I completely understand why members might want to ask about the matter. For me, the answer is quite simple. Ticketing is not new to the Olympic Games or the OCI and has been a function of the organisation for many years. I was not aware of any particular issue in London. There was nothing during my two-year tenure to give me and, perhaps, most of the board members any idea that there was something about which we should be concerned and, therefore, raise questions. Like many other board members, I suspect, I became aware of the significant issues concerning ticketing for the 2016 games only during the games. We are now becoming aware of other ticketing contracts, none of which was advised to us as board members.

I said previously and must restate I became aware before the games of some issues concerning swimming tickets because of my own sport. We have had challenges previously because swimming is one of the most popular sports at the Olympic Games. It is one of the sports that uses smaller venues; therefore, ticketing is always a challenge. I was not aware, however, that there was any particular significant issue concerning ticketing, which is what I suspect most of the board members will say also. I am speaking for myself.

I would like to clarify that I was not afraid to speak up during my time on the board. People who know me well know that I am pretty direct. When the issue of the ticketing arrangements started to be raised in Rio de Janeiro and the former president was arrested, there were clear red flags. At the time, there were most definitely decisions being taken without the knowledge of the board as a whole. Most of us had no indication whatsoever that the discussions were taking place between the Minister, Mr. Kieran Mulvey, the International Olympic Committee and the former president. We were not aware that those discussions were taking place. We had asked for information, but we did not know what was happening in those chaotic hours and days after the arrest of the former president and were not informed about or involved in the statements being made on behalf of the council. Therefore, we did take action. I personally had to insist on a board meeting being held in order that the board could be informed of what was going on and that the board as a whole could make relevant and appropriate decisions. I was backed by many other board members who felt the same. It took quite some effort by us collectively to have a board meeting because a certain number of board members had to agree to a meeting before it could be held. When it finally happened, the board set up the crisis sub-committee to help lead the response of the board to the unfolding situation. I was one of the three members of the three-person crisis sub-committee.

On the question of what the crisis sub-committee did, the first thing we did was to immediately secure the OCI database in order that all OCI data would be kept secure for future review. One will have heard the Minister say this morning - Mr. Justice Moran has also said it - that without these data, we would not have the report. It would not be available to us to talk about it today.

We commissioned Grant Thornton to carry out an independent review of what has happened and we may well now go back to Grant Thornton to see if it can shed some further light on other things that have come to hand. We commissioned the Deloitte report and the review of governance. That is why we were a long way down the road before this report was issued. We have been working on that since it came out in November 2016. We ensured, together with other members of the board, that, as much as possible, appropriate actions were taken. Having said that, I can tell the committee that the new board of which I am president has a very different culture. This board operates as a team. It is committed to high governance standards and is extremely united in its pursuit of a better and more athlete-focused organisation.

We are setting out very clearly the roles and responsibilities of board members and staff. That is vital to ensure that this sort of stuff does not happen again, so that people do not go off and sign agreements that nobody else knows anything about. We are completely committed to term limits, which means that there is an opportunity for different cultures within organisations and change to happen. We are not going to say that we know it all as a board. We have already had board training. We are committed to annual board training and we will allow ourselves, as a board, to be independently evaluated in the context of our performance. We are working on a clear strategy, in respect of which we are in consultation with our members, Sport Ireland and various stakeholders, regarding the way in which we should move forward as an organisation. We have a clear financial policy which sets out how contracts and other things are entered into, what due diligence should take place, who authorises what limits with regard to money and all the type of things that one would expect for good governance on the financial side. Our board members have all signed a code of business conduct which deals with many of the issues that we have already heard about.

There is not going to be any hiding place or opportunities for people to do solo runs because the relevant checks and balances will be in place. This is why the voluntary code of governance is particularly important. It is not enough just to implement the Deloitte report, one has to go wider in order to ensure that one is dealing with all the types of issues that are raised by the voluntary code. It has five primary principles and approximately 55 actions, so it takes time for it to be implemented, particularly if one wants it to be something that is part of the culture, not something that is forced but something that people believe in, adopt and make sure happens day in, day out.

One of the biggest and most fundamentally important things for me and this new board is that we have a functioning athletes commission in place. We have people who have been there, who have done it, have spent their lives pursuing it and want to leave their own legacy behind for future Olympians. We have to hear what they are saying. They have to be key in ensuring that athletes are centre to the decision-making of this organisation. The OCI and Sport Ireland are working together because the latter has also said that it wants to hear what this athletes commission has to say. I think that is extremely important. We are putting everything in place that needs to be put in place.

On another of the questions that was asked, we adopted the voluntary code of governance-----