Alan Kelly (Tipperary North, Labour)

Today's meeting has been convened with officials from the Department of Culture, Communications and Sport, with representatives of Sport Ireland and the Football Association of Ireland, FAI, to discuss matters relating to safeguarding policies and procedures within the FAI.

I welcome the following witnesses: Mr. Cian Ó Lionáin, assistant secretary for sport, and Mr. Ciarán Shanley, principal officer for sports capital, Department of Culture, Communications and Sport; Dr. Una May, CEO; and Ms Helen McHugh, director of ethics and integrity at sport, Sport Ireland; and Mr. David Courell, chief executive officer; Mr. Tony Keohane, chair; Mr. Paul Cooke, president; Ms Aoife Rafferty, people and culture director; and Ms Kirsten Pakes, child welfare and safeguarding officer, FAI. I also take this opportunity to welcome all the members of the media. I think it is the largest number of media we have ever had at a committee meeting in here.

I wish to make a few comments. I want to outline as Chair of this committee a deep concern at the manner in which the FAI, an organisation in receipt of significant State funding, has engaged with this committee to date.

I found it pretty astounding and unprecedented that any Oireachtas committee's intentions, not solely those of this committee, were being questioned regarding the manner in which we sought this meeting. I wish to put that on public record. I have been a Member of the Oireachtas for the guts of 20 years and I have never seen that before. These are very serious issues. The reasons we are here, as a sports committee elected by the taxpayers and citizens of Ireland, is because we have very serious questions to ask. We did so in a legitimate way as the representatives of the people.

My committee colleagues and I sought to schedule this meeting for 9 July 2025 to enable the committee to consider matters relating to safeguarding policies and their implementation by the FAI following the extraordinary documentary, “RTÉ Investigates: Girls in Green”, by the Sunday Independentand RTÉ, which examined allegations of inappropriate conduct in the 1990s towards female players. I compliment those who made it. Those journalists certainly did the State some service. The committee has made it quite clear that it does not propose to examine the specifics of any individual case under investigation, but rather to gain an understanding as to how the association complies with Sport Ireland’s robust safeguarding criteria. Following engagement with the FAI around the details of the meeting proposed by the committee, I accepted the FAI’s deferral request and sought to schedule the hearing for today, 24 September 2025. May I point out that the agenda for today’s meeting remains as first advised? It has not changed at all. It is troubling that the FAI sought to cancel the engagement when additional attendees were requested by members of this committee. They were not requested by me personally.

It is also concerning the manner in which there was a referral, through a piece of correspondence, from An Garda Síochána to this committee. I have never seen anything like this before relating to a committee. It is from an assistant principal officer, an unattested garda, and it basically states that there is a preference, or it would be preferable, that issues under investigation be concluded before any committee meetings take place. There is a committee on justice affairs, the Committee of Public Accounts and many other committees here that deal with many live issues in the public interest. If we had to operate by that rule of thumb, no committees would sit. We will be writing to the Garda Commissioner to ask him to explain this intervention, what was meant by it, as well as his and the organisation’s awareness of it.

It is also concerning that the FAI, while it reconsidered its position regarding today’s meeting, has not included the persons requested in its delegation before the committee today. This is very unusual. Although the FAI is a private organisation that is totally dependent on the taxpayers of Ireland, if a committee of the Oireachtas requests certain individuals to attend, they generally attend. It is a matter for the organisation, though. It is very regrettable - the committee has considered this - that those people have not been included today. I have no doubt there will be questions as to why that is the case.

The committee enters into today’s engagement in good faith. It is our expectation that there will be constant engagement today. I have no doubt that, as a result of this meeting, there may be further hearings scheduled with all parties here into the future, almost certainly before the year is out. That is my view as Cathaoirleach and it is the view of many people on this committee.

For transparency, the chairperson of the FAI contacted me during the week looking for a private conversation on this issue. I outlined to him that, while we could have a conversation, I obviously would be making it public, which I have since done. I was also contacted the night before last by Mr. Robert Watt, a director of the FAI, who wanted to talk to me, but I was unavailable. I contacted him the following day but there was no conversation. I wish to make contacts I have had with senior people in the FAI in the recent past regarding this issue abundantly clear. Furthermore, for transparency, for members who so wish, I propose they outline any communications they have had with any director or member of senior management of the FAI in connection with this meeting when they are making their contributions. I thank members and witnesses.

The format of today’s meeting is such that I will invite the witnesses to deliver an opening statement, which will be limited to five minutes. If they could take less time, that would be welcome. This will then be followed by questions from members of the committee. As witnesses are aware, the committee will publish the opening statements on its webpage.

Before we move to today’s discussions, I wish to clarify some limitations relating to parliamentary privilege and the practices of the Houses as regards references they may make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence of witnesses physically present or who give evidence from within the parliamentary precincts is protected, pursuant to both the Constitution and statute, by absolute privilege in respect of the presentations they make to the committee. This means that they have an absolute defence against any defamation action for anything they say at the meeting. However, they are expected not to abuse this privilege, and it is my duty as Chair to ensure that this privilege is not abused. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in respect of an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is absolutely imperative that they comply with any such direction.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect 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.

The committee has received correspondence from individuals in advance of this engagement regarding some of the items that have been flagged for discussion. I remind members that the names of individuals, or any personal information relating to them, should not be discussed publicly. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The committee is aware there is a Garda investigation in relation to the conduct of certain persons who were involved in football training. It is possible that prosecutions may be brought arising out of these investigations. It is vitally important that members and witnesses do not make any statements that could prejudice any potential trial or be used to try to argue that a fair trial is not possible.

I now invite Mr. Cian Ó Lionáin to make his opening statement on behalf of the Department.