Only swift and radical reform can overturn this shoddy governance

The crisis engulfing RTE has taken on a life of its own as its staff, trade unions and politicians all vex their understandable anger and disappointment over the recent revelations on how one presenter was paid in a labyrinthine manner that would be hard to make up if you had to!

Trust in RTE now appears to be at rock bottom, not only based on the current controversy but not helped by the boardroom leak in April 2023 on the process of appointing a new director general (DG) who is, in effect, the chief executive.

The government recently announced that it expects to be in a position shortly to finalise the terms of reference for a review of the governance and culture in RTÉ.  The longer the review takes, the longer the organisation will be in suspended animation.

Based on the revelations to date, it would appear that the board has failed to perform some of its key roles and responsibilities in terms of effective oversight, holding the executive to account, robust & constructive challenge of the executive and risk management.

It also appears that too much power and authority has been given to the DG and the board has failed to have the DG accountable for the use of this delegated authority. The Executive does not appear to have functioning as an effective and cohesive team. It looks like a case of a dominant DG without sufficient checks and balances in the governance framework to counter this. There also appears to be a culture where people are afraid to speak up and speak out about bad/dangerous/illegal practices. What channels did the board have with the executive / key managers without the DG being also in the room? 

There is a strong case of Governance 101 for the board as they don’t appear to have a good grasp of their duties as directors.  We didn’t know and we didn’t ask seems to have been the mantra.  

The issue of the pay for the top “stars” has been a hot issue for many years and should have been a key risk in the risk register, given its potential to damage the reputation of the organisation and its relations with the government.

So, what are the governance options going forward that may help to restore trust in the RTE, the board and the executive?

The government could decide to do nothing and leave the current board in place until the external review is complete. This may be the right thing to do from a due process point of view, but I suspect this will not satisfy all the stakeholders involved.  So doing nothing is not an option with the current board. 

From a political perspective, the government may want heads to roll, and the easiest one would be for the chair to be replaced by an interim chair that the government trusts until the governance review is complete. This may be grossly unfair to the current chair, but political expediency may come into play. Unfortunately, the buck does stop with the Chairwoman.

The Acting DG has also indicated that the new executive would need to be reconstituted once the new DG  is in place. The board must be all over this to ensure that executives with the appropriate integrity and skill sets are appointed.

Another option would be to sack the whole board now and replace it with an interim board that has the support and confidence of all stakeholders. However, as outlined below, this would be risky as the government may face legal actions from the current board members as their reputations would be damaged.

An interim option could be replacing the current board members as their terms of office come to an end and replacing them with new board members with the skills and experience more aligned with RTE’s future. This could also happen during the government’s review if any terms of office fall due during the review period. 

However, the government’s challenge here will be attracting new directors before the government’s review comes out. Who would want to risk their reputations (you only have one!) in an uncertain future RTE environment? So this may not fly.

Finally, the review’s outcome may throw up-skill, competency or culture deficiencies so critical that the board may be deemed unfit for purpose.

If this is the case, the government faces a real dilemma. Do they sack the whole board or just specific people? Exiting certain board members would be fraught with risk on all fronts.

However, sacking the whole board may draw a line in the sand between the past controversies and hopefully a bright new dawn for RTE, but it does have its downsides. The main one is the loss of valued corporate memory.  But then again, maybe everyone wants to bury the past and move on!

Once the government review is completed, there will no doubt be a need for a more robust governance framework at board and organisation level in RTE. 

For example, having clarity on what matters on the board only can decide such as: approving the annual budget, the statutory accounts, changes in the governance structures etc. 

There also needs to be clarity on what decisions the new DG can take without reverting to the board for approval.  

These decisions would typically include:

• Approving payments and contracts up to a certain level.
• Hiring staff below the executive level.
• Day-to-day operational decisions. 

Lastly, any organisation that needs to undergo the fundamental changes required at RTE will need strong leadership at the board and executive level.

Radical reform is required in the governance of RTE. Nothing less will do. RTE is now in the last chance saloon.