Mullen: Talk to me about this contradictory issue you have…<\/p>\n
Courell: Again, it was about the questions you were asking of us. Of the 16 questions, 10 concerned a specific case. So the fact that you were asking them meant that we did not think this would be about safeguarding. <\/p>\n
Senator Ronan Mullen: \u201cYou know that we know that you would have had to come together and get an answer for things. I don\u2019t know why you can\u2019t just tell us answers to these questions. The claim that legal advice prevents us from answering is sometimes the last refuge…\u201d<\/p>\n
Courell: \u201cThank you for appreciating our position. We would love to come in here and answer everything you are asking.\u201d<\/p>\n
Alan Kelly: \u201cWere ye ever aware of concerns relating to the issue in the documentary proir to January 2024?\u201d<\/p>\n
Aoife Rafferty: \u201cThis is a really challenging situation. I\u2019d love to be able to say go into detail. There were multiple different concerns that were brought. Some became a part of a Garda investigation. I don\u2019t know which ones.\u201d<\/p>\n
Kelly: \u201cThis is not difficult. It\u2019s a yes\/no.\u201d<\/p>\n
Rafferty: \u201cGenuinely, I know this is frustrating…\u201d<\/p>\n
Kelly: \u201cI\u2019ll move on.\u201d<\/p>\n
Pakes: \u201cI wasn\u2019t aware of any.\u201d<\/p>\n
Cooke: \u201cI was not aware.\u201d<\/p>\n
Courell: \u201cThis is more nuanced than you\u2019re asking. I think you\u2019re alluding to media concerns but beyond that I had no knowledge.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cCan you provide the committee with everything from 2024 that you feel in relation to this issue? Can you also provide a timeline that you will stand over in relation to these issues? Who was in what position from 2022 all the way up to today? Furthermore, all the costs relating to Project Magenta?\u201d <\/p>\n
Alan Kelly is asking his questions now. He brings up the concern\/complaint dichotomy again. \u201cNone of ye are willing to talk about the conern. We have established that as part of this process.\u201d<\/p>\n
Cleere brings up allegations of a \u201ctoxic culture in the FAI\u201d. Courell visibly bristles at this. \u201cI appreciate deputy that you\u2019re entitled to your own opinion. But the idea that by not answering questions here today it\u2019s reflective of a toxic culture, I reject that. We are here today respecting due process and respecting the confidence of the individuals involved. It shouldn\u2019t be taken as a signifier of a toxic culture.\u201d<\/p>\n
Cleere asks Paul Cooke if he has 100 per cent confident in his board and how they have dealt with this situation.<\/p>\n
Cooke: Yes, absolutely.<\/p>\n
Peter \u2018Chap\u2019 Cleere: \u201cYou said in your opening staement that no disrespect was meant. Well, disprespect was felt. What did you mean by all this \u2018contradictory messaging\u2019 stuff?<\/p>\n
Kelly: I will interject here. As a committee, we completely reject your contention on that.<\/p>\n
Courell mentions a back-and-forth between the committee and the association and says that when they kept asking for more detail about board meetings, they felt they had to turn down the invitation. Deputy Cleere is decidedly unimpressed.<\/p>\n
Gibney asks about Siptu now and their concerns around voluntary redunancies. She asks at the end whether the job cuts will affect safeguarding.<\/p>\n
Courell says they are in regular engagement with the unions. \u201cI have continuously stated that we will speak to our staff first. But in the context of this session, there will be no impact on safeguarding.\u201d<\/p>\n
Gibney: If there\u2019s an assault against an adult and that assault is witnessed, is there an obligation on the witness to come forward.<\/p>\n
Pakes: The witness might go to the Garda\u00ed but the Garda\u00ed might not pursue it.<\/p>\n
Gibney: Do you know how many people ahve come with concerns through RaiseaConcern and how many did before then?<\/p>\n
Pakes: There have been 129 concerns through RaiseaConcern. Regarding safeguarding, we have had 109 people coming to us.<\/p>\n
Courell: RaiseaConcern was introduced just over a year ago. Of the 129 conerns, 43 were outside the remit. That leaves 86 cases, of which 17 are closed and 16 are open.<\/p>\n
Sinead Gibney TD (Soc Dems): I understand confidentiality concerns for the FAI when it comes to ongoing cases. But in your opening statement you talk about people not being unheard. And yet when we asked certain people to appear in front of this committee, their voices are unheard here.<\/p>\n
Courell: I believe we are doing outstanding work on safeguarding. We are driving every day for greater standards.<\/p>\n
Joanne Byrne TD (Sinn F\u00e9in): The uncertainty of the last few days and the coming and the going probably hasn\u2019t covered ye in glory.<\/p>\n
Byrne: Can you outline how many outstanding legal cases are there at present?<\/p>\n
Courell: In terms of safeguarding, I don\u2019t think there are any.<\/p>\n
Byrne: How many stand-down order are in place?<\/p>\n
Pakes: There are some in place but I can\u2019t give any numbers. I would like to but I cannot.<\/p>\n
Byrne is crystallising the core point the committee is chasing after here. \u201cThe dispute seems to be between the fact that a concern was raised in May 2023 and the complaint was made in January 2024. What\u2019s the difference?\u201d<\/p>\n
Courell: \u201cIn generic terms, if someone came to me and said, \u2018Something is happening\u2019, I would want to give them a safe space to say it. But I would then tell them to engage in the process.\u201d<\/p>\n
Malcolm Byrne (FF) is asking about safeguarding now and the complaints that were made in 2024. He asks the Department of Sport and Sport Ireland when they were aware of the complaint.<\/p>\n
The Department says April 2024. Sport Ireland says around the same time.<\/p>\n
Carrigy: With regard to the national team, were you aware of these issues? (He\u2019s talking about the stuff in Eileen Gleeson\u2019s case)<\/p>\n
Courell: I will try my best to answer that, within the limitations. We have not had an opportunity to mount our defence but it will be reboust. It will be right and proper for us to make a comprehensive defence…<\/p>\n
He goes on to filibuster then and Carrigy moves on.<\/p>\n
Michael Carrigy (FG): This is like American TV, with people pleading the fifth to get out of answering questions.<\/p>\n
Carrigy: We have corresondence from Eileaan Gleeson where she expresses a desire to come in here. Why would you not want somebody who this committee asked to come in?<\/p>\n
Keohane: We thought it would be completely inappropriate for somebody who is taking a case against the organisation to come in here and speak publicly. <\/p>\n
Senator Alison Coymn is up now. She is asking about various timing matters, including asking Courell when the FAI first knew about the allegations. Courell said after the documentary came out that it was January 2024.<\/p>\n
She is asking him if he stands over that statement and he is saying he does.<\/p>\n
Comyn: \u201cCan you withdraw that statement, given that it is public knowledge that you were part of an email chain in 2023?\u201d<\/p>\n
Courell: \u201cNo, a formal complaint was only made in 2024. Anything before that was not a complaint.\u201d<\/p>\n
O\u2019Sullivan: Paul Cooke, you are the president of the FAI. When was the board aware of the allegations?<\/p>\n
Cooke: Apologies again but we are not prepared to answer questions on specifics.<\/p>\n
Kelly: Sorry now, this is extraordinary. You can answer basic questions like this.<\/p>\n
Cooke seems quite sheepish now at being taken to task and allows that they heard about it in January or Fenruary 2024.<\/p>\n
O\u2019Sullivan: In the event of an allegation of this type (sexual), would a stand-down notice be given? Would it be immediate?<\/p>\n
Kelly: This is a generic quesiton now. You can answer it. <\/p>\n
David Courell: I know it will be frustrating for you as it is for me, but we can\u2019t answer these questions.<\/p>\n
O\u2019Sullivan: This reminds me of another chief executive who came in here and responded to the committee in this manner and it did not end very well for him.<\/p>\n
Courell: Genuinely, we mean no disresepct. But we are simply not prepared to endanger a Garda investigation. We must remember these are real people. <\/p>\n
P\u00e1draig O\u2019Sullivan (FF): \u201cI\u2019d like to start by reading from an FAI statement the day after the documentary.\u201d<\/p>\n
Alan Kelly: \u201cI\u2019m sure ye won\u2019t mind answering questions on your own statement.\u201d<\/p>\n
Aoife Rafferty: \u201cI think we have made an environment where people can come forward.\u201d <\/p>\n
Tony Keohane, FAI Chairman, interjects to say that the FAI\u2019s priority is not to endanger the course of justice but Kelly isn\u2019t having it. He says that these committees are well used to dealing with issues even when there are court cases pending and that they are entitled to expect some questions to be answered.<\/p>\n
N\u00ed Chuileann: \u201cWould you like to put on record whether you knew about the allegations before the documentary?\u201d<\/p>\n
Aoife Rafferty: \u201cNo. I would like to but due to legal advice, I cannot.\u201d<\/p>\n
N\u00ed Chuileaan moves onto Aoife Rafferty, People and Culture director and asks did she orchestrate a PR response to the documentary. She evades the question as well, moving Alan Kelly to ask for a pause.<\/p>\n
\u201cIs this the sort of answer we\u2019re going to get from everybody?\u201d asks N\u00ed Chuileann.<\/p>\n
N\u00ed Chuilleann asks Kirsten Pakes, Child Welfare & Safeguarding Officer of the FAI when she found out about the allegations that came to light in the RTE documentary. Pakes prevaricates over her answer, drawing the ire of N\u00ed Chuileann and Alan Kelly.<\/p>\n
This is a bad starts for the FAI.<\/p>\n
Onto the question and answer session. First up, Senator Evanne N\u00ed Chuileann…<\/p>\n
\u201cFor transparency, I was contacted by Eileen Gleeson. I advised that she come in front of the committee and it is a pity she is not here.\u201d<\/p>\n
David Courell is up next…<\/p>\n
I appreciate the Committee has also requested the presence of Eileen Gleeson and Gareth Maher. Neither of these individuals have a direct role in safeguarding, and the FAI is fully satisfied that the five representatives here today are appropriate witnesses to address the Committee on matters of safeguarding policy, governance and oversight, and that they can represent the Association in full.<\/p>\n
res.<\/p>\n
The Committee is aware from our recent correspondence that on foot of guidance from An Garda S\u00edoch\u00e1na and separate legal advice, we have been unable to share certain<\/p>\n
materials sought, and that we are obliged to avoid discussing the specifics of any case. Just to outline that even discussing correspondence without naming individuals can impact a case, especially when that same correspondence has been detailed in media, which has named the individuals involved and has pinpointed it as relating to them.<\/p>\n
I\u2019d also like to acknowledge the uncertainty over our appearance here today and would like to reassure the Committee that no disrespect was intended. It was borne out of a genuine concern that the Association has had regarding some of the contradictory messaging we have received about the scope of this hearing.<\/p>\n
I believe that nobody here today would want to undermine these investigations and the rights of the individuals involved, and so we hope to proceed today with care and to remain within the stated scope of today\u2019s agenda.<\/p>\n
When concerns were raised following the \u2018Girls in Green\u2019 documentary last year, we noted that the robust policies and reporting structures that we now have in place, were not in place to protect the individuals affected in that documentary back in the 1990s. The courage of the individuals involved who came forward underscores why this work matters.<\/p>\n
The FAI also made three clear statements:<\/p>\n
\u2022 Nobody should ever feel unsafe in Irish football.<\/p>\n
\u2022 Nobody should have felt unsafe in the past.<\/p>\n
\u2022 And nobody should feel unheard.<\/p>\n
Opening statements now from The Department of Sport, Sport Ireland and the FAI.<\/p>\n
Some selected highlights…<\/p>\n
Cian \u00d3 Lion\u00e1in, Assistant Secretary for Sport, Culture, Communications and Sport<\/b><\/p>\n
The allegations made by women involved in football in the 1990s were truly shocking and the bravery of those who came forward to tell their stories is commendable. It is vital that allegations of this nature are taken seriously and dealt with in the appropriate manner. Last year\u2019s reporting of this story, both in print and on television, played an important role in bringing those stories to light.<\/p>\n
Great strides have been made in increasing female participation in Irish sport in recent years, which now stands at 47%, its highest level ever. The continued investment by the Department in Sport Ireland\u2019s Women in Sport Programme – \u20ac4 million in 2025 – funds projects and initiatives across a wide range of sports, supporting the Government\u2019s vision where women have an equal opportunity to achieve their full potential in sport.<\/p>\n
These measures, while positive, must of course be supported by a robust safeguarding framework for all who participate in sport. It is imperative that we demonstrate that there is simply no place for abuse of any kind in sport and there should be zero tolerance for any actions that endanger welfare.<\/p>\n
That\u2019s a very clear and succinct broadside from the committee chairman against the FAI. They are not at all happy with the FAI messing them about in advance of the meeting. It will be interesting to see what Courell\u2019s response will be.<\/p>\n
Alan Kelly begins by taking a swing at the FAI for prevaricating over coming in front of the committee.<\/p>\n
\u201cI\u2019m in the Oireachtas 20 years and I never saw this before. That anyone would question this committee\u2019s reasons for calling a meeting is troubling… <\/p>\n
\u201cThe agenda for this committee meeting hasn\u2019t changed… <\/p>\n
\u201cIt is concerning that the FAI, while it reconsidered its reason for attending, has left out people who we have asked to attend. This is very unusual. If a committee asks for certain people to attend, they generally do attend…<\/p>\n
\u201cI have no doubt that as a result of this, there will be further meetings scheduled. And almost certainly before the year is out…<\/p>\n
\u201cFor transparency, the FAI president contacted me during the week looking to speak privately. I told him I would be making it public.\u201d <\/p>\n
The Committee meeting has begun but the first 15 minutes are in private. The public part of it will start at 12.30.<\/p>\n
Committee Chariman Alan Kelly TD (Labour): <\/b><\/p>\n
\u201cWe welcome the opportunity to discuss matters relating to safeguarding policies and procedures within the Football Association of Ireland (FAI). \u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cIt is important to note that certain matters relating to safeguarding in football are the subject of an active investigation by An Garda S\u00edoch\u00e1na.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cThe allegations made by women involved in football in the 1990s were shocking and the bravery of those who came forward to tell their stories is commendable.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cCases such as these serve as a reminder of the need to be ever vigilant and of the importance of Safeguarding Policies and Procedures in our efforts to create, protect and promote a culture that allows people to speak out about anything that makes them uncomfortable, in all sports.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
Just for the completists out there, here are the runners and riders for today\u2019s session. <\/p>\n
– Mr. Cian \u00d3 Lion\u00e1in, Assistant Secretary for Sport, Culture, Communications and Sport<\/p>\n
– Mr. Ciar\u00e1n Shanley, Principal Officer Sports Policy, Culture, Communications and Sport<\/p>\n
– Dr. \u00dana May, CEO, Sport Ireland<\/p>\n
– Ms Helen McHugh, Director of Ethics and Integrity at Sport, Sport Ireland<\/p>\n
– Mr. Tony Keohane, Chair, Football Association of Ireland<\/p>\n
– Mr. Paul Cooke, President, Football Association of Ireland<\/p>\n
– Mr. David Courell, Chief Executive Officer, Football Association of Ireland<\/p>\n
– Ms Aoife Rafferty, People & Culture Director, Football Association of Ireland<\/p>\n
– Ms Kirsten Pakes, Child Welfare & Safeguarding Officer, Football Association of Ireland<\/p>\n
The FAI always seem to come to these things on the back foot for whatever reason. It seems especially odd for them to be all up in a heap this time around, given that this is supposed to be yet another new dawn. How they face down the politicians\u2019 questions will be fascinating to watch today. David Courell, the FAI\u2019s CEO, is a very polished performer. <\/p>\n
Here\u2019s a piece on how he handled an ask-me-anything media briefing a few weeks ago:<\/p>\n
\nDavid Courell is well able to sit through an hour of questions. But what use is that when everyone already knows the FAI is such a dire mess? Today\u2019s column. https:\/\/t.co\/nJzAb6Wrbs<\/a><\/p>\n
\u2014 Malachy Clerkin (@MalachyClerkin) September 13, 2025<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
[\u00a0FAI chief\u2019s cool demeanour was at odds with an organisation groaning under the strain of debtOpens in new window<\/a>\u00a0]<\/p>\n
Today\u2019s Oireachtas appearance comes as Eileen Gleeson says FAI told her not to attend, reports our soccer correspondent Gavin Cummiskey:<\/p>\n
Eileen Gleeson<\/a> has said that a \u201cdirective\u201d from the Football Association of Ireland<\/a> (FAI) told her that it would be \u201cwholly inappropriate\u201d to attend Wednesday\u2019s hearing of the joint Oireachtas committee on sport.<\/p>\n
The former Republic of Ireland<\/a> head coach, who is currently taking legal action against the association, had \u201crepeatedly expressed a desire to attend\u201d the hearing as an FAI employee or in a personal capacity, she informed the committee on Monday afternoon.<\/p>\n
However, Gleeson says she received a \u201cdirective\u201d from the FAI people and culture director explaining that it would be \u201cwholly inappropriate for you [Gleeson] to attend the committee in any capacity in circumstances where the FAI will not be in attendance\u201d.<\/p>\n
The FAI chief executive David Courell confirmed recently that a \u201cvery robust\u201d defence was being prepared by the association against legal action being taken by Gleeson on the grounds of gender discrimination. Despite the legal case being taken against her employer, Gleeson was recently named as the association\u2019s head of football strategic insights and planning.<\/p>\n