Marc MacSharry (Sligo-Leitrim, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Last week, I raised several issues regarding State borrowing by the Football Association of Ireland, FAI, in circumstances where there are governance questions to be answered. Since then, I have done as the independent chairman of the FAI asked in his late night statement of last week, and checked my facts and find not only that I must stand over my comments but that other serious governance issues and questions arise.

On the question of the independent chairman's authority to sign the memorandum of understanding, MOU, my understanding is that the first the board saw of the MOU was a draft sent on the morning it was signed. Despite emails from directors expressing concerns about its terms no board meeting was held to consider or approve the MOU before the independent chairman went ahead and signed it that afternoon. At a later date, despite the expressed reservations of a number of the board members the board approved the document. They had little choice but to do so as it had already been signed.

The second question I raised is the assertion by the independent chairman of the FAI that the required "expressed sanction" under Article 3.8 of the FAI constitution was given by the council for the State borrowings by the FAI. My question is how can the chairman make this claim when, as I understand it, his own board has not received let alone approved any terms and conditions or other legal agreement from the State for these loans. Bizarrely, my understanding is that board members are unaware of any legally binding loan agreement with the State, even now, for the FAI borrowings. The MOU expressly stated that it is not a legally binding document. It seems the State has lent and the FAI has borrowed significant funds already on the strength of no legally binding contract. Perhaps the independent chairman has signed a legally binding loan agreement with the State and intends to seek his board's approval at a later date, as he did with the MOU. If he did, I am sure they will be hearing from him. I am led to understand that the board has approved no legal contract, as required by the MOU. How can the independent chairman claim express sanction from the FAI council for a legally binding State loan agreement that either does not exist or, if it does, has not been shown or explained to or approved by his own board, let alone the council members? He points to a resolution of the council which was approved by council on 16 March last by email as evidence of authority to borrow these State funds on behalf of the association. There was no reference whatsoever in the formal notice of, agenda for or resolution in which he refers the meeting to State borrowings. They all refer exclusively to the Bank of Ireland borrowings.

The day before the meeting, due to the Covid crisis, council members were asked to consent to the vote happening by email. The formal request from the interim chief executive office, CEO, of the FAI to council members sets out, with complete clarity, what the council was being asked to vote on. It was sent to all council members and copied to the independent chairman and each board member. In it, the interim CEO says:

Tomorrow's meeting has been called solely to approve the re-financing proposals with Bank of Ireland. There are no other items on the agenda for the council meeting.

It also says: "In order to proceed on that basis, we require a majority of you to consent to approving the re-financing proposal with Bank of Ireland via email." The council members then consented to authorising Bank of Ireland re-financing being approved by email. There was no mention of borrowings from the State whatsoever and so no consent to voting on it. The council sanction required is an expressed sanction. According to the Oxford English Dictionary this means formal permission for something that is clearly and intentionally stated. There is no wording in the resolution passed which gives any sanction for the State borrowings. Not only is there no amount, no repayment date, no interest rate and no other terms outlined, there is no reference at all to borrowings from the State. How could there be if the FAI board has not approved them? The independent chairman claims to have a resolution, as if by magic, formal permission for something that is clearly and intentionally stated. The independent chairman's proposition is clearly a ridiculous one. The email vote was sanctioned only on the basis that it was for the Bank of Ireland re-financing, nothing more.

See this speech in context