Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. O'Loughlin. The last evening we were here, we had legal advice that prevented us from having a detailed questions-and-answers session. That was beyond our control. We had to be mindful of the advice.

I am disappointed that the report on the financial governance of the organisation is not finished. This has attracted a lot of media attention. A CEO retired. According to the transcript of the PAC meeting the IHRB representatives attended, the CEO got "58% more than the amount payable if the scheme conditions had been applied as stated to the CEO". It is very difficult for us to understand how this could happen in an industry that receives very significant public funds. That there was no contract in place is an issue. It defies logic that a person with no contract in place could have been the chief executive of a State-run organisation. I just cannot get my head around that. In Mr. O’Loughlin's opening statement, he referred to personal gain and said there does not appear to be any question of misappropriation or personal gain. I accept the first point, but surely a CEO getting significantly more than was deemed appropriate implies personal gain. I presume he benefited from the "58% more than the amount payable if the scheme conditions had been applied as stated". In my view, that was most definitely personal gain. I do not know how you could determine it in any other way. I presume, because the report is not finished, that Mr. O'Loughlin is going to tell us he cannot get into the details about the case. The time-lapse in the investigation into the governance of the IHRB is completely and utterly unacceptable. There are serious questions to be asked about how what happened arose. The time lag is definitely doing no good to anyone or the reputation of the IHRB. I am not happy that the investigation is not concluded. I fully accept that Mr. O'Loughlin is new in his post, but given there were issues of such serious public concern, the report should be long finished and the recommendations should be on the table.

On doping, I am worried by the following statement by Mr. O'Loughlin:

... there are some high-priority recommendations that require additional funding. Plans are in place to implement these remaining recommendations when resources allow.

Ultimately, ensuring the integrity of the sport is paramount. Mr. O'Loughlin rightly said the sport is very valuable to the economy and comprises a very valuable business, with very many making a living out of it. He said that there are 30,000 jobs and that €2.5 billion is added to the economy. Therefore, the statement that there are some high-priority recommendations that require additional funding does not rest easily with me. As with everything else, there are advances being made in the technology of those who want to cheat the system, and we have to keep pace with these to ensure defrauders cannot benefit. None of us wants to see anyone who is doping horses gaining financially from it, and we want to stamp it out completely, but I am worried about the statement that there are high-priority recommendations that require additional funding. My first question was on the report and the delay in producing it. Is Mr. O'Loughlin prepared to answer my questions on the departing CEO and on waiting for resources to implement high-priority recommendations? I would like a full explanation, please.