The current controversy within the FAI regarding payments to Chief Executive Jonathan Hill "harks back to the old days", according to members of the Oireachtas Committee on Tourism, Sport and Media.
The committee members also suggested the recent revelations could prove a "hammer blow" to the association.
A 12-person FAI delegation attended the briefing at Leinster House, including chief executive Jonathan Hill, former independent chair of the FAI Roy Barrett, newly elected president Paul Cooke and independent board member Liz Joyce, seeking to highlight the FAI's Facilities and Infrastructure Plan in relation to aspirational funding of €863 million over fifteen years to improve football facilities.
However, the conversation quickly turned to the controversy regarding the overpayment to the chief executive in 2022 for holidays not taken and expenses related to commuting from England, which saw Hill's pay exceed an agreement with the Government.
Barrett admitted last weekend that he had made the decision to approve the payments, however, it was revealed at the sitting that Liz Joyce of the remuneration committee had, at the time, offered an opinion that it was "not good practice", adding that she would not recommend it.
The payment was subsequently approved by Barrett, who did not feel that he had to inform the board in relation to his decision, nor did he revert back to Joyce to tell her that the payment was made.
Fianna Fáil TD Christopher O’Sullivan was first to question the FAI, and he grilled the chief executive regarding the background to the payments.
Hill said that he had never contemplated asking for cash for the unused holidays until it came about as a result of an email conversation, where it was revealed that another employee of the association had received pay for holidays not taken.
It also transpired that the chief executive’s reasons for not taking the 12 outstanding days were similarly considered "extraordinary circumstances", which ultimately resulted in the additional payment.
According to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Government, the chief executive’s salary was not to exceed that of a departmental secretary general (€216k in 2022), however, Hill’s additional payments took him beyond the threshold.
Hill has subsequently paid back the surplus, however he was quizzed about his understanding of the FAI’s staff handbook, which does not allow for payment for holidays not taken.
The chief executive claimed that he was not aware of the implications of the payment until the KOSI report uncovered the issue, however, O’Sullivan was not convinced, stating that it was reminiscent of previous payments within the association, which caused a furore within the FAI back in 2019.
"An enquiry was made to me back in December 2022 by chair Roy Barrett," said Joyce, when questioned by O'Sullivan.
"My opinion on the matter was that it was not good practice, and I wouldn't recommend it.
"I became aware that the payment had been made in September of this year. I had heard nothing susbsequent to the enquiry, so yes it was a surprise to me at that time
"As far as I was concerned, I had given an opinion and had heard nothing further," added Joyce when asked whether she should have brought it to the renumeration committee.
"So It was in the form of an enquiry and not a proposal. The query as far as I was concerned was completed."
Barrett was then asked for an explanation regarding the payment, and while he confirmed that Joyce had given him her "not best practice" opinion, he decided to authorise it anyway as he felt these were "truly exceptional circumstances".
O’Sullivan finished his allotted time by saying that he felt that the controversy "harked back to the old days", and was a "hammer blow to the FAI", and remarked that he felt that the answers were "not adequate".
Fine Gael TD Alan Dillon then put it to Hill that the FAI had been selective with their approach to implementing all the requirements of the MOU, and in particular condition 35, which relates to the CEO’s salary.
He also asked Hill whether he felt it was credible to defend the association in relation to the area of governance.
Hill denied the suggestion regarding condition 35, stating that it was not a linear approach to the MOU’s 163 recommendations, while adding that he genuinely believed that the FAI had made progress and are set to continue to make progress in 2024 and beyond.
Dillon again asked Joyce about the role of the remuneration committee, and while she reiterated that she had offered her opinion to Barrett, she added that she felt that it was the end of the matter, as she had heard nothing further, and assumed the matter was closed.
Joyce made a point of mentioning that, in her opinion, the "breaches were unintentional and at all times the salary paid to the CEO was in line with the secretary general… and as soon as the committee and the board were informed about it, it was immediately addressed".
Sinn Féin TD Chris Andrews accused Barrett of arrogance in relation to his role in the payment controversy, saying he had an assumption that he knew better that everyone else.
Andrews also referenced the previous FAI regime, claiming that the controversy was "very worrying" and urged the minister for Sport to review all the FAI’s decisions of the last three years.
Defending himself from Andrews’ accusations, Barrett said that he made the decision "in good faith, never trying to hide anything" and added that "any decision I made, I wanted to be in line with MOU".
Barrett announced at the start of the year that he was resigning his role as chair of the FAI, yet denied that his decision to leave had anything to do with the ongoing issue, when asked by Fine Gael Kerry TD Brendan Griffin.
Griffin also asked Barrett if he felt that public confidence in the FAI had been eroded.
"It certainly may be dented," said Barrett, before adding that "the facts remain, that there had been substantial improvement in every aspect of the organisation".
FAI board member Liz Joyce tells Oireachtas committee the then independent chair Roy Barrett asked her about potential holiday pay in lieu to CEO Jonathan Hill back in December 2022. She says her opinion was that "it was not good practice" and she "would not recommend it". pic.twitter.com/zV1R0RSapp
— RTÉ Sport (@RTEsport) December 13, 2023
Sinn Féin TD Imelda Munster also grilled Barrett regarding his decision-making, suggesting that he made a deliberate decision not to inform the board.
"I didn’t make a decision not to inform the board," said Barrett. "I didn’t believe it wasn’t the norm."
"Did you ever hear such rubbish?" said Munster.
It was a Sport Ireland-commissioned audit that identified Hill's payments, and chief executive Dr Una May was also in attendance at today's hearing.
"From our perpsptective, we believe that the progress that has been made has been transformational," said May. "The organisation has become a very secure and solid organisation.
"There have been some mis-steps in recent months and we all are disappointed to have seen that...
"We will continue to monitor it. The organisation has come from a very, very low base to what we believe, quite a solid base.
"We do have ongoing questions that we will continue to monitor. We will report to minister a full overview of the entirety of the MOU and within that we will give a very clear indication of all the steps within the MOU, and all the different recommendations.
"We could give you an indication and a flavour of the level of scrutiny that we have put in this case, we did identify that there were some questions to be answered and we followed through with an audit," said May when asked how she could be 100% sure that it won't happen again.
"So we have demonstrated a very clear commitment to monitoring these situations as they emerge and we will continue to monitor and support the FAI in that process."
