Eoghan Kenny confronts I.F.I. over alleged false insurance cover-up
Eoghan Kenny pressed I.F.I. officials over the handling of inaccurate insurance documentation after a 10 August 2021 incident, accusing the board of knowingly allowing false documents and failing to notify the employee and Garda Shea Kona. I.F.I. representatives said insurers only clarified that cover would be declined in mid-November 2021 and that neither the employee nor Garda Shea Kona were notified on the date the organisation received that information.
During the committee session Eoghan Kenny questioned an I.F.I. representative about who was contacted during a break; the official said they had rung the compliance officer rather than the board chair. The exchange covered who within I.F.I. had been made aware of the findings and when that awareness was communicated.
Kenny outlined that there were three findings — two relating to the incident itself and one concerning false insurance documents — and challenged why the board appeared to be refuting the allegation that it had knowingly allowed inaccurate documentation. I.F.I. representatives said the board and executive had been officially told about inaccuracies on 16 November 2021.
I.F.I. explained that the incident was notified to insurers after 10 August 2021 and that insurers sought clarification about whether the vehicle had been declared. According to the officials, a series of communications continued until mid-November 2021 when the insurer indicated it would decline cover for that vehicle.
Kenny pressed that the employee and Garda Shea Kona were not told on the date I.F.I. received the insurer's clarification; the official confirmed they were not notified on that date. The deputy also asserted the employee was not informed until October 2022, while I.F.I. said it had been in contact with the employee during the intervening period but acknowledged the formal notification timing was contested.
The exchange referenced an external investigation from the minister's office that, Kenny said, concluded I.F.I. had knowingly allowed the inaccurate documentation to be presented. The deputy cited I.F.I.'s staff code of conduct and the requirement to show an insurance certificate to local guards within 24 hours after a road traffic accident when questioning why the organisation had not acted sooner.
Key exchanges
During the committee session Eoghan Kenny questioned an I.F.I. representative about who was contacted during a break; the official said they had rung the compliance officer rather than the board chair. The exchange covered who within I.F.I. had been made aware of the findings and when that awareness was communicated.
Findings and board position
Kenny outlined that there were three findings — two relating to the incident itself and one concerning false insurance documents — and challenged why the board appeared to be refuting the allegation that it had knowingly allowed inaccurate documentation. I.F.I. representatives said the board and executive had been officially told about inaccuracies on 16 November 2021.
Timeline of insurer correspondence
I.F.I. explained that the incident was notified to insurers after 10 August 2021 and that insurers sought clarification about whether the vehicle had been declared. According to the officials, a series of communications continued until mid-November 2021 when the insurer indicated it would decline cover for that vehicle.
Notification to employee and Garda
Kenny pressed that the employee and Garda Shea Kona were not told on the date I.F.I. received the insurer's clarification; the official confirmed they were not notified on that date. The deputy also asserted the employee was not informed until October 2022, while I.F.I. said it had been in contact with the employee during the intervening period but acknowledged the formal notification timing was contested.
External probe and conduct rules
The exchange referenced an external investigation from the minister's office that, Kenny said, concluded I.F.I. had knowingly allowed the inaccurate documentation to be presented. The deputy cited I.F.I.'s staff code of conduct and the requirement to show an insurance certificate to local guards within 24 hours after a road traffic accident when questioning why the organisation had not acted sooner.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
Other speeches
Tego samego dnia All speeches from this day →
Brian Stanley
Brian Stanley Urges Simpler Funding for Homecoming Festivals
Richard Boyd Barrett
Richard Boyd Barrett on Film Funding: Demands Tighter Rules
Paul Murphy
Paul Murphy demands practical help for Gaza refugees
Conor D McGuinness
Conor D McGuinness Repeatedly Says "Thank You Very Much"
Brian Stanley
Brian Stanley urges raising school minibus age limit to 75
Conor D McGuinness
Conor D McGuinness Thanks Minister, Requests Five-Minute Return
Transcript
How much time do I have? Five minutes. Perfect. So, obviously, in relation to the records, after the break there, you just corrected in relation to three findings. I presume you rang someone during the break to find out. I did indeed, yes. Did you ring the chair of the board? No. You rang a member of the board? I rang our compliance officer who deals with all our PDs. So the compliance officer didn't make you aware that findings were released to the board? They were released to the army. Apparently, today, he made you aware of that. She? No. It's not something that I would have dealt with at the time, Deputy. I thought you were talking about a different issue that we were dealing with. What issue? What different issue? It's an issue around the same thing. A contact was made from Angarda Chikana, number 7. This contact would have been made from the Department? Pardon? This contact would have been made from the Department? Yes. It was as a consequence of a contact from the Department that there was an issue to be considered by the Chair relating to Angarda Chikana. Okay. So you have three findings, two in relation to the incident itself, one in relation to the false insurance documents. The board are refuting the false documents? That's correct. We can all refute it. There's no refuting this. It's a matter of fact. The 16th of November 2021, the board of the IFI, as well as the Chief Executive Officer, were made aware, officially at that stage, that the documentation was inaccurate. Yeah. That's correct. The board didn't provide that evidence to Angarda Chikana. It's knowingly allowed an individual to present insurance documentation that we knowingly knew was false. That's the issue that was being refuted. What would you say then to the former CEO of the Public Accounts Committee who said he knew on the day of the accident? I can't speak for the former deputy. How can the board refute that when the former CEO said that he knew on the day? We have clear evidence to demonstrate that that case was, that we did not know we had a liability until the insurance company came back and told us in November of that year. The insurance company told yourselves in November that the documentation was inaccurate? That cover would not be extended to that vehicle? No, no. Documentation provided to Angarda Chikana was inaccurate? No. The cover, the insurance, I'll let the head of logistics who was dealing with it answer that, but it's the cover piece. Deputy, the insurance policy that we had, when the incident arose on the 10th of August 2021, the insurance company was notified of the incident and there was a clarification sought by the insurers in relation to whether that vehicle had been declared. It wasn't a case that they had said on the date of the incident that there was no insurance and no indemnity going to be provided. And it was through a series of communications with the insurers over the period up until mid-November 2021 that we got clarification that in this case they would be declining cover. Why didn't you bring that to the attention of Angarda Chikana or the staff member at that stage? I.F.I. had been in contact with the employee. Not until October 2022 you didn't make the employee aware of that, a year later. There is correspondence between I.F.I. and the employee in respect of trying to resolve the issue with the insurers. No, no. You made October 2022, you made the employee aware that the vehicle was uninsured and the only reason you did that was because he received a letter from the solicitor and a personal claims letter to say that the insurance that he provided to Angarda Chikana was inaccurate. The employee was in contact with I.F.I. prior to that notification. In other words, I.F.I. was trying to keep the employee appraised of this situation. It may be the case that a notification went in 2022, but it's not true to say that we weren't in contact with the employee. Did you say to the employer, to the employee, that the car was not insured? We received this on the 16th of November 2021. The car is not insured. Not at that time. Why? I've no... You threw him under the bus. You allowed him. Sorry. You allowed him. I.F.I. supported that individual employee. You allowed him to continue with the false documentation that he provided. Knowingly allowed him at that stage. I.F.I. didn't... Knowingly... Two pieces from the Code of Conduct for the I.F.I. staff. Policy of the I.F.I. to comply with all relevant statutory and regulatory requirements governing its operations. If anyone other than you is involved in an RTA, you must show your insurance cert to local guard even in 24 hours. You were made aware on the 16th of November 2021 that the insurance documentation that he provided within that 24 hours period was inaccurate and you failed to tell him and you failed to tell on Garda Shea Kona. The board are now refuting that. The... The... The I.F.I. The board don't have his leg to stand on here. An external investigation was taking place... Took place... From Minister Eamon Ryan's office. The external investigation basically said that you knowingly allowed this to happen. You did. Because on the 16th of November, three months after the crash, three months after the crash, you officially knew at that stage. And you still failed to tell on Garda Shea Kona or the employee. The... Subsequent to the... Is that a fact? If I can elaborate, please. Can I just ask, is that a fact? Yes or no? It's a fact that the insurers in mid-November come back to Inland Fisheries Ireland with a definite... Is it a fact that you did not tell on Garda Shea Kona or the employee when you received the official documentation that the car was uninsured? Yes or no? On the date that we received that information, the employee and the in Garda Shea Kona were not notified. Subsequent to receiving that correspondence... That's the critical thing there. If I may elaborate, Chair. Subsequent to receiving the notification from the insurers, IFI also sought further legal advice on the matter. The advice provided us with certain avenues to look at and exhaust. Which were? These included contacting the ombudsman, the ombudsman for pensions and financial services. And also there is an arbitration process within the policy itself, which allowed for IFI to have an opportunity to challenge the decision of the insurers. And these processes took time subsequent to their original letter in mid-November of 2020. The legal advice you received, they didn't turn around to you and say, you know, you gave false documentation to the employee, he then in turn gave it to the Garda Shea Kona, you're after receiving confirmation that it wasn't insured, you know, you should go in and tell the employee and on Garda Shea Kona, because this is a live investigation. There was no advice to that effect. The IFI had confirmation in mid-November that there was a declination of indemnity in relation to that vehicle. None of the other vehicles that were in the 15 that were identified as being. If there wasn't a car crash, you would have still continued with 16 uninsured vehicles on the road. I can't speculate on that. There's no speculation, it's a fact. Well, I cannot speculate when or who would have realised there was a clerical error in respect to that. The bottom line here, the bottom line is, there was an employee of Inland Fisheries Ireland involved in the car crash. He knowingly, on the 16th of November, continued to allow that false document that he gave to him to provide to the Garda Shea Kona, he knowingly allowed that to continue. And that's a fact. I think if he could furnish us with a full note on what you've said there. Could I also ask if they could furnish us with the legal, you contacted solicitors after the 16th of November. Can you furnish us with those legal documents that you received, advising you on what to do? Thanks, Deputy Kenny. Deputy Kenny, can you please?