Terms of Reference for a Senate Inquiry into the Future of Rugby Union in Australia

[SPaRTAN]

Here is the pulled The West article by Nick Taylor for anyone interested. I cannot beleive it has been pulled, looks like there will be no JUSTICE. The ARU look like they have got off scot free in the court of public oppinion and also the media - disgusting!

Senate hearing: Did ARU investigate axing before Force alliance?

Nick Taylor

Tuesday, 17 October 2017 8:48AM

Western Force fans were left devastated by the team’s axing.Picture:*The West Australian

The Australian Rugby Union was investigating axing a side from Super Rugby before Western Force signed the controversial alliance agreement with the governing body, the senate hearing into the future of the sport in Australia heard yesterday.

Cutting a side was discussed by the ARU board as late as August 18 last year – eight days before the agreement was finalised.

Senator Linda Reynolds questioned whether RugbyWA should have been told about the discussions before they signed the agreement that ultimately led to their demise.

Senator Reynolds said the ARU board was given a briefing by former chief operating officer Rob Clarke and head of professional rugby Anthony French on cutting the Australian sides from five to four.

"You can understand Western Force's concerns that they were not aware of these discussions. Is that not something you should have disclosed to Western Force?" she asked ARU chairman Cameron Clyne.

"Given that you were actively, for some months, considering the option of cutting a team, I believe Western Force had a right to know because what the alliance document did by accident or design was gave you an opportunity to cut them."

Mr Clyne claimed no decision about axing a side was made until April this year and he did not recall the August meeting last year.

The hearing was also told that Imperium Sports Management was technically insolvent in New Zealand when it bought Melbourne Rebels debt free from the ARU for $1.

Senator Reynolds described it as the deal of the century with $13 million written-off, $6 million in increments and another $1.8 million of creditors paid out.

"This whole deal is very, very puzzling," Senator Reynolds said.

"Someone who has not run a major Australian sport before, how they were given a whole rugby franchise for $1 and incremental payments that no other Super Rugby club got.

"We understand that there were no conditions placed on Imperium on how they used the money.

"We have heard evidence that this money, probably quite rightly under the contract, did go to Imperium and their many associated organisations and companies here and in New Zealand to pay off debt because it was actually a company that was technically insolvent, we understand, in New Zealand.

"We are puzzled about the due diligence. How could it ever have happened that there was such a generous offer and they were still in trouble.

"They paid themselves consultancy fees more than they were paying the players and the staff combined.

"They were using that money to pay themselves exorbitant fees.

"I'm not sure who did your due diligence Mr Clyne but they missed a lot it seems. I think from what we've seen and heard you might want to sack them."

Mr Clyne said due diligence was carried out. He did not know about the technical insolvency.

"During due diligence no red flags were raised so the issue of insolvency didn't come up," he said.

Mr Clyne questioned the need for the hearing saying he was disappointed by the line and tone it had taken as it focussed on the ARU's sale of Melbourne Rebels rather than the future of Australian rugby.

Mr Clyne said claims by former Wallaby John Welborn, now rugby adviser to Andrew Forrest who has vowed to back the Force, that he had asked for $70 million from the mining magnate to reinstate the Force were false and a complete misrepresentation.

He said there were only promises and no binding financial support from WA for the Force.

[Jules]

Emailed the West asking why it was taken down

[Kalahard]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...d925a184ca6fcc

Some Pandaram spin for you. Then again if he was half a journalist he would have been onto this a while ago instead of paying the ARU for access to propaganda

A TERSE senate inquiry has raised major concerns with the ARU’s deal to sell the Melbourne Rebels licence to businessman Andrew Cox, with ARU chairman Cameron Clyne strongly defending the axing of the Western Force.Clyne tried to defend it but couldn't get his story straight and admitted the ARU had badly blundered the process.

Clyne appeared at the hearing in Canberra last night and was grilled by West Australian senator Linda Reynolds, who called for the inquiry into Australian rugby’s future.

Reynolds last night raised explosive allegations Cox’s Imperium Sports Group — which purchased the Rebels licence for $1 — used millions of dollars of ARU grants to pay themselves lavish management fees instead of putting that money into the Rebels.

“We are of the understanding that that contract made no reference to all of those additional $5.5 to $6 million worth of extra grants, over and above every other Super Rugby team, that there was no conditions on it,” Reynolds said.


“So if Mr Cox had wanted to take all of that money, and we understand a lot of that money went out to his various companies, you’ve got no concern that there wasn’t even a condition in the contract that that money had to be tied for rugby purposes?

“If you had a look at their books, they’ve paid themselves in consultancy fees more than they were paying the players and staff combined, so that didn’t raise alarm bells?”

Clyne responded: “I don’t know the ins and outs of what was occurring, we did due diligence on the assessment, we looked at their financials.

“The reality is they’re a commercial entity, they had to make a decision with regard to how to run the game, and we oversaw an element of financials. The financial cost to the Rebels was very unfortunate, as was the cost to many other teams.


“The issue we had to make was how do we draw a line under this and how do we have four teams going forward?” The ARU sure did make an issue out of this.

The ARU announced earlier this year they would be axing the Force from Super Rugby, and after two unsuccessful court appeals they were folded.

But concerns have been raised about the ARU’s alleged preferential treatment of the Rebels, the other team in consideration for the chop.

In the end, Cox exercised a put-option in his contract, allowing him to sell the licence to Victorian Rugby Union for $1, thereby ending any avenue the ARU had of axing them. Again, incorrect reporting. There was 2 put options. Both needed ARU involvement and approval to enact. ARU facilitated the VRU deal ignoring all past and future financial risk. A glaring omission of fact by Pandaram

The ARU had rescued the Force from insolvency by taking over their finances and chose to scrap the Perth club.Again, misleading reporting.
The Force were not insolvent, they requested an advance to settle a debt. The ARU then offered the Alliance Agreement. RugbyWA accepted the Alliance Agreement in good faith but as has been revealed, the ARU were already in the process of determining how to cut a team. There is evidence that the ARU was discussing cutting a team in April 2016, the ARU even commissioned external reports into this. The ARUs reviews and recommendations around cutting a team were not disclosed to RugbyWA who have testified that they had other alternatives ready but believed collaboration with the ARU would be the most beneficial to both parties.



Pandarams trying to put his ARU masters spin on this but has conveniently left out some important facts. The main point being that the ARU mislead RugbyWA into the Alliance Agreement that was amended by ARU lawyers to trigger their axing. This whole situation would be completely different if RugbyWA was not duped into an agreement that the ARU had ulterior motives towards. Senator Reynolds told the inquiry that they had had testimony and evidence that the ARU had been discussing dropping a team before the Alliance Agreement was entered into but made no attempt to notify RugbyWA about it's discussions or plans. These discussions get disclosed to RugbyWA, RugbyWA then seeks alternative arrangements.

[GIGS20]

Didn't he say at one point WA government offered nothing but then Linda pointed out the offer from WA was superior than Vic. I admit I kepr turning off because I got so annoyed but did I miss something it was that correct?

Substantial was the word, that doesn't necessarily mean superior.

I loved how Clyne was banging on about nothing from WA other than "vague promises" but when questioned about the vic govt money he was quick to state "that deal is done" not so quick to affirm that the amound was "substantially reduced"

He also kept on pointing to the fact that the Force had burnt through "an incredible amount of money" in 2016/17, but when questioned about the fact that the Rebels had actually received more in both years COUNTING the 3.7 Million he seemed to lose his memory again.

Didn't have his fingers on key figures from annual reports even though his opening statement identified how much the inquiry had focused on finance....you think he would have prepared some sort of a defense!

[GIGS20]

As Clyne pointed out, NO other sports have had a senate Enquiry. And he is chairman of the board, ex chief of NAB, and has already fronted another Senate Enquiry. Yet the silence in the fourth estate is deafening. Sheesh, if it was Demetriades and the Essendon drug scandal it would be front page....oh wait....even THAT didn't crack a Senate Enquiry.

Yes Patsy, you have made history. The opposite is true, your perfidy is the only one in Aus sport that has warranted the Enquiry

I'm sure he's ot the only director of a company accused of duplicitous, fraudulent and highly questionable business dealings to have been hauled in front of a Senate Inquiry, particularly when you think that this business does receive substantial financial funding, appears to have lied on annual reports and tax returns and just sacked 20% of it's workforce without compensation.

So it's a sporting body...big deal, It's still a business.

[Bakkies]

One point the senators let Clyne spout spin on quite a few times, when comparing the Rabble's financial track record, was his assertion that the ARU board considered "private ownership to be worth exploring, as it works in other sports/countries". The immediate question should have been..... WHY. Why would you want to explore that any further? Please explain the reasons why the board thought that, in the face of so many reasons it looked foolhardy at best, sinister at worst. The VRU had previously been handed the licence back after a failed private ownership. The ARU had to take over the running of the franchise back then - the VRU had no money to fund it. Why would you then have another go at it? And if you were crazy enough to do that why would you not undertake absolutely comprehensive due diligence? When a simple on-line search would reveal your preferred owner was insolvent you still went ahead, losing tens of millions in the process, handing over even more unconditional millions whilst ignoring a bid which would not cost you a cent?

I hope that will be hammered home in the report. I said before these hearings started that I'd be satisfied just to see these questions aired and these liars be exposed, but wasn't confident any further action would eventuate. Still think that but I'm far from satisfied. I hope I'm the pessimist here and all the optimists are right.

You really couldn't make this stuff up.

Rugby WA and Twiggy explained it pretty clear why they didn't go down the path of having a private owner. Obviously went in one ear and out the other with the ARU.

[Jules]

Story back on the West

[Bakkies]

I'm sure he's ot the only director of a company accused of duplicitous, fraudulent and highly questionable business dealings to have been hauled in front of a Senate Inquiry, particularly when you think that this business does receive substantial financial funding, appears to have lied on annual reports and tax returns and just sacked 20% of it's workforce without compensation.

So it's a sporting body...big deal, It's still a business.

Braveheart told me on Green and Gold Tuesday news why he thinks it won't go any further. I am not going to waste my energy when the evidence is already out there on public record. They also didn't do their due diligence on NZ reporting as it is far more tangible than Australia.

[Bakkies]

He also kept on pointing to the fact that the Force had burnt through "an incredible amount of money" in 2016/17

He won't check the financials that will prove de Clyne. You don't even need to pay ASIC a fee as they are up on the Senate Inquiry website. That's the first time I have seen him mention the Imperium deal.

Said it a while back these Rugby journos not just in Australia don't take the unions to task as they are dependent on them for exclusives.

Story back on the West

Probably was just updated which happens. Nothing on the Fairfax wires.

[Alison]

Bloggers, roarers, pathetic humans like Pandaram masquerading as journalists can all say and do whatever they like. The only documents that are worth the 'paper' they're written on are the Hansard record, the answers to questions on notice, and the eventual report from the Committee. The rest is all useless, worthless noise.

[Bakkies]

Is anyone able to get Wayne Smith's article up as the usual trick doesn't work for it?

Here's the link http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spor...1af54d906560eb

[SPaRTAN]

Story back on the West

Any word on why it was removed? Its been put back on the site but its been banished from the front page to the obscure rugby section hidden from view. The West are really dropping the ball on this, Nick Taylor is doing a great job but it seems he is having this fight with one arm tied behind his back. The lack of news coverage on the most damning of inquiry's is unbelievable really.

I wonder if The West Austrtalian Newspaper removed the story through ARU pressure? Gutless.

[SPaRTAN]

Is anyone able to get Wayne Smith's article up as the usual trick doesn't work for it?

Here's the link http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spor...1af54d906560eb

This one?

ARU already in talks to axe team when Force licence taken over


Australian Rugby Union chairman Cameron Clyne
WAYNE SMITH
The Australian12:00AM October 17, 2017
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on email
Share more...
11 Comments

The Australian Rugby Union had discussed cutting the number of Australian Super Rugby teams from five teams to four in August last year, eight days before entering into the Alliance agreement with the Western Force at which the Perth club voluntarily handed over their licence, a Senate Inquiry was told last night.

It was this decision to hand over their licence to the ARU, in what it thought was part of a national plan to centralise the game and its administration, that ultimately enabled the ARU to axe the Force in September this year.

The question was asked of ARU chairman Cameron Clyne, giving evidence to the Senate Inquiry on the Future of Australian Rugby, why the ARU had not informed the Force that it was discussing axing a side — even if a formal decision to remove one of the teams was not made until April this year — at the time it was negotiating to buy their licence.

Initially Clyne took exception to Senator Linda Reynolds’ question, querying how she had come into possession of confidential board documents.

“That’s interesting,” Clyne said.

“I’d be very disappointed if you’ve been given some information because all current and former directors have given an undertaking that they are adhering to the directors’ duty, so if you have received a board document — which I’d be surprised if you had given those undertaking — that you (Senator Reynolds) and I need to refer something to ASIC (the Australian Securities and Investments Commission) because that’s very concerning.

“I guess what I assume it is you’re driving towards is that there was a secret agenda or something to perhaps ...”

Senator Reynolds at that point cut him off. “Mr Clyne, I’m not suggesting that at all. I’m just saying that given that the (ARU) board … the ARU management will conduct a review noted above in order to recommend the Super Rugby team to be reduced by the next board meetings … that’s a pretty definitive statement.


“My question to you is: should that have been disclosed to the Western Force before the Alliance agreement was signed?” Clyne: “Not until the board makes a decision. We’re always exploring strategic options.

“The board had not made a decision. Our desire was to maintain five teams if we could. Why would we spend $4 million bailing them out?”

Senator Reynolds persisted, however, insisting that the ARU for some months was actively considering cutting a team and by not disclosing this fact to the Western Force as part of these negotiations, the club made a decision they have regretted to this day. “My point is that I believe the Western Force had a right to know because what the Alliance agreement did, by accident or design, was give you an opportunity to cut them. Because there was nobody else.”

Clyne rebutted this claim, insisting that the Melbourne Rebels were also in contention for the axe.

However, there is no question that because the ARU owned the Force’s licence and was allowing them to compete in Super Rugby on that condition, they were always the club most vulnerable in the entire culling process.

[Bakkies]

This one?

Thanks a million that's the one.

[SPaRTAN]

He won't check the financials that will prove de Clyne. You don't even need to pay ASIC a fee as they are up on the Senate Inquiry website. That's the first time I have seen him mention the Imperium deal.

Said it a while back these Rugby journos not just in Australia don't take the unions to task as they are dependent on them for exclusives.



Probably was just updated which happens. Nothing on the Fairfax wires.

Both stories had 614 characters. Nothing has changed.