An extraordinary and often fractious hearing of the Oireachtas committee on sport laid bare profound disagreements among Rowing Ireland, Sport Ireland, and committee members over responsibility, accountability, and athlete welfare, with repeated calls for apologies, stronger oversight, and an independent safeguarding mechanism for elite athletes.
Tensions were evident before the opening statements, with Chair Alan Kelly placing on the public record a series of last-minute communications from Rowing Ireland, including legal correspondence, unsolicited phone calls to committee members, and confirmation that the organisation’s Chief Executive would not attend. The Chair described the sequence of events as “unprecedented” in his nearly two decades of parliamentary experience.
He cited Minister Patrick O’Donovan’s assertion last year that attendance by the right people was not a request but an expectation for a body receiving substantial state funding.
The Vice-Chair Evanne Ní Chuilinn disclosed that she had received a missed call and a text message from the Rowing Ireland CEO the previous evening, seeking her “confidence and support” ahead of the hearing, an interaction she said she found inappropriate. Members across the committee later returned repeatedly to the absence of senior figures who had held leadership roles during the period under scrutiny.
We have to recognise that this was a criticism of the CEO’s position in these circumstances and, if possible, remove any personal feelings and an understanding of the pressures on Michelle Carpenter as an individual.
Sport Ireland admits delays but defends its remit
In her opening statement, Sport Ireland CEO Dr Úna May acknowledged that some athletes had experienced serious welfare issues within the Rowing Ireland high-performance programme and said the agency “regretted” those experiences. However, she stressed that Sport Ireland operates within a strict statutory framework, lacks investigative powers, and must respect confidentiality where athletes have not made formal complaints.
That position came under sustained attack from committee members, who cited a timeline from 2017 through 2024 during which warnings were repeatedly raised, most notably by Paul Gaffney, a Sport Ireland contracted clinical psychologist in 2021, 2022, and again in early 2024.
Members questioned how concerns described by athletes as a “culture of fear” could persist for three Olympic cycles without decisive intervention. Several pointed out that despite those warnings, Sport Ireland funding to Rowing Ireland increased significantly in the post-Tokyo period. sis for the increase.
Una May accepted that Sport Ireland was “disappointed” that an independent culture review was not carried out after Tokyo 2020, as expected, but said funding decisions were driven by the expanding number of athletes qualifying for elite support. She confirmed that in July 2024, a tranche of high-performance funding was withheld pending evidence of reform, but stressed that funding was used as a “last lever” rather than a punitive weapon.
That explanation did not satisfy many members, who argued that Sport Ireland’s athlete welfare policy explicitly allows the suspension of funding when serious issues are not addressed.
Rowing Ireland resists ‘toxic culture’ label
Rowing Ireland Chair Barry McWilliams sought to emphasise the sport’s Olympic success, rapid growth in participation, and recent governance reforms, including a largely renewed board and a new head of high performance. He accepted that some athletes’ experiences were “not acceptable” but pushed back strongly against repeated claims that the organisation had operated a toxic culture.
That resistance became one of the hearing’s flashpoints.
Pressed repeatedly to issue a direct apology to athletes who have spoken publicly about mistreatment, McWilliams declined to do so in explicit terms, instead saying he “regretted” that such experiences had occurred. The refusal prompted visible anger from several members, with Peter Chap Cleere describing the stance as “incredible”.
The expression of regret acknowledges harm without responsibility; an apology accepts responsibility for harm. The difference can be material in legal terms if uncomfortable in human ones but we can only imagine that this was advised by the Board’s legal advisers as a line not to be crossed in this hearing.
When committee members asked whether Rowing Ireland accepted that a toxic culture had existed, McWilliams and board colleagues said they believed the current environment was positive and improving, while acknowledging “instances we regret”. The insistence that the culture was not toxic drew audible reactions from the public gallery, where former athletes were present.
The missing review after Tokyo
One of the most damaging admissions concerned the failure to conduct an independent post-Tokyo review of the high-performance programme, despite expectations set by Sport Ireland and the emergence of safeguarding concerns earlier in 2021.
Rowing Ireland accepted that the review should have taken place and described its absence as “disappointing”, but said the current board was not in place at the time. Committee members rejected that explanation, arguing that unresolved historic issues continue to shape organisational culture and athlete trust.
Several members warned that culture change cannot be achieved solely by appointing new personnel or focusing on future cycles, particularly when athletes from previous cycles feel their experiences have never been acknowledged or addressed.
‘No safe place to report’
Perhaps the most significant consensus to emerge from the hearing was agreement that Ireland’s elite athletes lack a genuinely independent mechanism to report welfare or safeguarding concerns.
Evanne Ní Chuilinn highlighted the power imbalance that was a part of the relationship between coaching staff and athletes at this level. It is an environment where coaches and performance directors control selection, funding and career progression. Members argued that expecting athletes to make formal complaints within their own organisations is unrealistic and unsafe.
In a sense this brought things full circle back to the opening statement of Mary O’Connor, CEO of the Federation of Irish Sport who independently, albeit with Sport Ireland funding, employ an Athlete Support Manager to provide direct support to athletes within the High Performance system, independent of their individual sport.
18 athletes across seven sports have availed of this service in the just over a year since it was established.
The role is sensitive and based on time and trust but has no investigative powers and is currently a single individual covering dozens of sports and hundreds of athletes. The Federation warned this represented a “single point of failure” and called for a national adult safeguarding policy and an independent external referral pathway with investigative authority.
Sport Ireland officials acknowledged the gap and said they were open to considering expanded powers or new structures, including models used in countries such as New Zealand and the Netherlands. However, they conceded that no such system currently exists.
Whatever comes from this episode and this hearing, that is likely to be the one area where a potential significant improvement is both possible, already scoped out and needs to be implemented.
Funding, accountability and trust
Throughout the hearing, members returned to the central question of accountability: who is ultimately responsible when athlete welfare concerns persist for years without resolution?
Several accused both organisations of prioritising medals and performance outcomes over athlete wellbeing, pointing to increased funding during periods when serious concerns were known but unresolved.
Sport Ireland rejected that characterisation but accepted that issues were not resolved in a timely manner. Rowing Ireland insisted it is now moving in the right direction but acknowledged ongoing legal constraints that limit how historic matters can be addressed publicly.
What happens next?
The Chair described the hearing as “extraordinary” and confirmed that the committee will now consider all evidence, correspondence and documentation before making formal findings and recommendations to the Minister. As we reported last night the Ministers have already instructed the establishment of an independent investigation and it would seem most likely that the role and the pathway to access the Athlete Support system already in place will be significantly enhanced.
Image Credit: Houses of the Oireachtas
Event Tickets
Upcoming Events
SPORT FOR BUSINESS
Sport for Business is Ireland’s leading platform focused on the commercialstrategic and societal impact of sport. It connects decision-makers across governing bodies, clubs, brands, agencies and public institutions through high-quality journalism, events and insight. Sport for Business explores how sport drives economic value, participation, inclusion and national identity, while holding organisations to account on governance and sustainability.
Through analysis, storytelling and convening the sector, it helps leaders understand trends, share best practice and make better-informed decisions. Its work positions sport not just as entertainment, but as a vital contributor to Ireland’s social and economic fabric.
Find out more about becoming a member today.
Or sign up for our twice-daily bulletins to get a flavour of the material we cover.
Sign up for our News Bulletins here.
