Letters to the Editor: Executives at RTÉ shifted the blame on to Ryan Tubridy
According to one reader: 'It is RTÉ management which needs to be radically rationalised. Unless that happens, Ryan Tubridy would be well advised to take his talents elsewhere.' Picture: Oireachtas TV
Congratulations are due to RTÉ for destroying the market value of their greatest talent. It is not as if RTÉ is overflowing with marketable talent.
It is not the role of an agent to ensure that RTÉ are following the requirements of their own internal audit department and indeed their external auditors. Had the invoice read “for marketing services” as opposed to “for consultancy services” it would not even have been misleading.
Big companies like Renault frequently use external PR or marketing agencies to organise specific events. There was no reason for Noel Kelly to suppose that the instruction to invoice Astus was anything other than standard practice in RTÉ. Indeed, it was: RTÉ had three separate barter accounts to support numerous promotional and entertainment activities.
We also don’t know the full extent of RTÉ’s commercial arrangements with Renault of which the Ryan Tubridy payments were just a small part. Had RTÉ agreed to provide additional promotional activities in return for Renault becoming The Late Late Show title sponsor?
To describe Noel Kelly’s claim that he was merely following the RTÉ prescribed process is absurd. What else was he supposed to do, when his sole role was to ensure his client was paid sums previously agreed?
Not only was Ryan Tubridy paid considerably less than his predecessor, Pat Kenny, he took a 20% pay cut during covid and declined a loyalty bonus of €120,000. That he, as an independent contractor, undertook to do additional work for Renault to be paid for separately was nobody’s business but his own and that of RTÉ and Renault. Let them account for that, rather than seeking to tarnish the reputation of Mr Tubridy, who undertook to do the additional work in good faith.
The fact is, he is still contracted to lead six Late Late Show-style events for Renault which were delayed by the pandemic. Should Renault, or whoever succeeds them as The Late Late Show title sponsor, decide not to proceed with them, Tubridy has agreed to reimburse the sums paid for them. He cannot do fairer that that.
Whatever happens to Ryan Tubridy as an Irish broadcaster, it is very clear that several senior RTÉ executives attempted to mislead the public and then sought to shift the blame on to Mr Tubridy and his agent. In doing so they did far greater harm to RTÉ’s reputation and standing than any dodgy expense accounting could ever do.
Sadly, the failure to take responsibility for mistakes made is the one constant in all aspects of Irish public life. It is RTÉ management which needs to be radically rationalised. Unless that happens, Ryan Tubridy would be well advised to take his talents elsewhere.
Dáil committee members have gone about their task in relation to governance at RTÉ with energy and enthusiasm and wonder and I wonder if a similar level of energy might be applied to two related issues of supreme importance for humanity: threats from climate change and decreasing biodiversity.
Oireachtas committee members from across the political spectrum have challenged those with power and authority in our public service broadcaster as to their use/misuse of that power such that significant and desirable change in RTÉ seems inevitable.
On the issues of climate change and biodiversity, members of the Oireachtas are themselves the people with power and authority to bring about significant and desirable change.
An appropriate mechanism needs to be developed so that they too can be challenged about their performance in relation to what is the most critical issues of our time. Perhaps a sub-committee of the relevant Citizens’ Assembly together with a number of independent experts might provide a starting point.
I am hopeful that Oireachtas members would respond with similar energy and enthusiasm even if they are now the ones whose performance is being scrutinised. Such scrutiny would certainly bring environmental benefits and, additionally, would provide Oireachtas members with a golden opportunity to model best practice in accounting for that which they bear responsibility.
Whatever about RTÉ with all its problems, the Oireachtas committee system is scarcely fit for purpose either.
In the past weeks we have witnessed very poor harmonisation between two committees (PAC and Media) while coordination and sequencing within each committee was just as unsatisfactory.
On basics alone for instance, members of both committees asked too many similar questions while overlooking some glaring questions especially in terms of follow-up.
Against this background it may be salutary to recall that the Ceann Comhairle, in his apology to Ms Angela Kerins after the Supreme Court ruled in her favour in the aftermath of her 2014 appearance before the public accounts committee, said that the Dáil will be looking at streamlining how committees function, indicating amongst reforms to be undertaken, that “the idea of witnesses coming before two or three committees is patently ridiculous”.
There seemed to be a striking similarity between the Oireachtas media and sport committee’s hearings this week in that those summoned seemed intent on answering questions they were not asked. The sitting that sought information on what lurks behind the GAAGO controversy was informed by both the GAA and RTÉ representatives that “it is not possible to broadcast all championship matches”.
Apart from the fact that in the current championship, they have all but done exactly that, but with most games broadcast behind a paywall, nobody I am aware of has made any such demand on either RTÉ or the GAA. All the calls that I have heard are for a plan to ensure that all the games from the quarter-finals out are broadcast free-to-air with as many as possible of the earlier games also broadcast either live or via a “highlights” programme.
The great fear that I frequently hear expressed is that since the GAA appointed a commercial director, the success or failure of their every action is gauged on how much income is generated. They are beginning to appear now to be no longer the guardians of our games but rather the owners with the freedom to use them to achieve ends that do not always rhyme with what the founding fathers intended.
The best way to promote and nurture any team game is to ensure that it is accessible to as many people as possible. Putting games behind paywalls that could easily be broadcast free-to-air is at utter variance with that objective.
The best way out of current controversies is to vigorously reassert the amateur principles on which the GAA was founded.
I had to read Jennifer Horgan’s column twice before realising that she is actually urging a return to the Christian faith (A return to our ancient faith is exactly what we need, , July 7).
Her use of the word “pantheism” was misleading, since it suggests a pagan outlook, unlike the “panentheism” which Richard Kearney urges on the basis of beautiful texts from Pelagius, Eriugena, Duns Scotus, and Gerard Manley Hopkins.
It is also misleading to say John McQuaid co-authored the Constitution.
As Dermot Keogh clarifies: “John Cooney’s term ‘co-maker’ implies that the future archbishop enjoyed an equal share with de Valera. But de Valera was not the ‘other’ author of the 1937 constitution. To over-personalise in this way the functioning of government under Fianna Fáil is to distort a complex reality. If there was a single author of the 1937 constitution then that author must have been John Hearne, the legal officer in the Department of External Affairs.”
In this age of recycling, there is surely an opportunity for someone to come up with toilet paper that can be recycled.
