Imelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Right, and that was furnished because the loan came to light. Mr. Conway, responding to Deputy Catherine Murphy, said that the fact of the matter was that the loan was managed the way it was managed. The question is why it was managed in that way. We are still none the wiser as to that. The FAI representatives also said that the awareness of the loan was confined to a certain number of people. Are the FAI representatives saying that the three people, or perhaps more, that information was confined to deliberately chose not to inform the rest of the board? It returns to the board as a corporate body having overall responsibility. The FAI also declared that it is committed to learn from what has happened. No sooner did I hear that but I thought back to the Genesis report in 2002. That report came out of areas of concern, shall we say, that had arisen. It contained serious recommendations in relation to the code of governance that were never implemented so how can the FAI expect people to have confidence that it will learn from what has happened if it has not corrected all of its errors from the past?

The internal report was mentioned. When I first read that the FAI was bringing Grant Thornton in to assist but also to investigate the €100,000 loan I wondered why would a board bring in somebody else to investigate something the people in the room here know the answers to?

The same response was given today that Grant Thornton is investigating. We also have the statement from John Delaney but the people here know the answers. It appears that the two fingers are being given to Sport Ireland, this committee, the grassroots of the FAI and sports clubs. Does Mr. Conway agree?