New Zealand Rugby Board Chair Dame Patsy Reddy during the Media conference to announce Allan Bunting as the new Black Ferns Director of Rugby at New Zealand Rugby, Auckland, New Zealand on Friday 10 February 2023. Mandatory credit: Andrew Cornaga / www.photosport.nz Photo: Andrew Cornaga / www.photosport.nz
New Zealand Rugby says calls for the board to step down are a distraction as the stoush over changes to the governance structure at the top level of the game continues.
Earlier this week the New Zealand Rugby Players' Association (NZRPA) hit back at NZR board plans to enact an adjusted governance change to the one proposed by the Pilkington report last year.
NZRPA boss association head Rob Nichol reiterated that they had "not supported any of the proposals NZR or the provincial unions have made regarding NZR's governance reform".
Nichol cited a "lack of trust and confidence in the current leadership of NZR" and is in favour of adopting the recommendations of the report with no concessions and called for the NZR board, chaired by Dame Patsy Reddy, to step down and re-apply for their positions under the framework of the review.
Rob Nichol. Photo: Photosport
Wellington Rugby chair and Provincial Union spokesperson, Russell Poole, on Thursday agreed.
"In terms of the board standing down, I'd probably frame it in a slightly different way. The process we're (PUs) looking at, we probably think it be advantageous that they stand down and be invited to apply," Poole said.
"We're not suggesting that in an assertive or aggressive way, it's just that we think it's probably the best process around getting from where we are today, to where we need to be."
New Zealand Rugby on Friday released a statement expressing frustration at the demands for the board to resign.
"Calls for the current NZR Board to stand down are a distraction, and do not accurately reflect the findings of the governance review, which was focused on governance reform at a high level, rather than any concerns around the perceived performance of the current board. The fundamental issue remains the fact that the current governance structure, based on a representative model, is no longer fit-for-purpose in a changing operating context," the statement said.
"The NZR Board remains committed to the principle of an independent board, an independent process for board appointments and a well-managed transition period.
"As the independent governance review found, a shift from the current representative model of governance to an independent model of governance is critical for enabling the board to have a single-minded focus on the execution of strategy to best position rugby in the future for all of its stakeholders."
NZR said the board would eventually have to re-apply for their positions as part of the change to governance structures.
"Over the transition period proposed for implementing the shift to a fully independent model, the entire current board would go through the independent board appointment process in less than two years.
"The board's focus is on working with our voting members on the details of a resolution they will support to achieve that objective of a shift to an independent model of governance. Any constitutional change requires a two-thirds majority of votes at a special general meeting (SGM), so it makes sense to work constructively with voting members ahead of this to ensure we can honour the commitment to an independent model of governance in the best interests of all rugby stakeholders."
New Zealand Rugby will meet with the NZRPA, Provincial Unions and other stakeholders over the next week to try and come to an agreement over which proposals will be put forward, with the NZR Board hoping to find a resolution by the end of this month.
At this point the NZR Board is working on a modified proposal, rather than wholly accepting the recommendations made in the independent Pilkington review last year.
The NZRPA wants the review's recommendations to be implemented in full, while the Provincial Unions are finalising their own proposal which guarantees provincial union experience on the board.
That could result in either one, two or three proposals being voted on at a special general meeting, which should take place in the next three to eight weeks.
