The fallout from the Pilkington Review into New Zealand Rugby’s (NZR) governance structure has taken another turn, with NZR’s Pasifika Advisory Group (NZRPAG) throwing support behind an alternate proposal by the provincial unions. 

Despite agreeing with the findings of the review published in August last year – a 134-page independent report that found the current governance structure was not fit for purpose and recommended implementing a new system that would produce nine independent directors to sit on the board of the national body – seven months of negotiations between NZR and the unions have failed to produce a unanimous agreement that this is the best way forward. 

NZR chair Dame Patsy Reddy has, therefore, opted to present unions with a choice of voting for the most radical governance change in the game’s history – one that will lessen their power and influence in favour of full independence – or to greenlight a less dramatic change that will preserve the unions’ status as the key decision-makers in the national game. 

In a statement, NZRPAG said they were formally endorsing the provincial unions’ proposal that seeks to maintain three board representatives with at least two years’ experience on a provincial board. 

“The NZ Rugby Pasifika Advisory Group – Tausoa Fa’atasi is formally supporting and endorsing the new Governance Proposal to be put forward by representatives of NZ Rugby’s Provincial Unions in response to the NZR Governance Review. 

“The Co-Chairs of the advisory group, Pauline Luyten and Tauanu’u Nick Bakulich, have stated – ‘We believe the bespoke nature of the new governance model proposed by the Provincial Unions is purpose-fit for our New Zealand environment and equally, it reflects an appreciation of our unique Pasifika contribution, expertise and impact across all levels of our game.’ 

“Official NZR player data shows that despite Pasifika occupying nearly 40 per cent of teams across the All Blacks/All Blacks 7′s and Black Ferns/Black Ferns 7′s, there is 0 per cent representation of Pasifika at the NZR Board level. 

“The Co-Chairs also acknowledged the Provincial Unions for demonstrating genuine leadership in listening and engaging meaningfully with the advisory group in the spirit of openness and co-operation – ‘This allowed us to talk openly and constructively to find common ground for the betterment of our game not just for Pasifika, but for all those with a vested interest in the future success and sustainability of rugby in Aotearoa’.” 

It comes after the Herald revealed that NZR board chair, Dame Patsy Reddy, was prepared to resign if the provincial unions voted through their alternative proposal. 

The review concluded the current governance model was not fit for purpose, and recommended moving to a new system where all directors are independently appointed by a panel comprised of two people independently appointed by the Institute of Directors (IOD), one independent member – not a current NZR director – chosen by the board and two members picked by the new stakeholder council that it has been suggested be formed. 

But the make-up of this panel has been a source of contention for the provincial unions, who have put forward various alternatives in closed-door negotiations with NZR – all of which have given them majority representation and ultimately the ability to control who is appointed to the board. 

Reddy remains hopeful NZR’s latest transitional model to achieve an independent nine-person board will bridge the impasse. But if the provincial unions hold firm in their position to maintain at least three members on the NZ Rugby board with two years of provincial board experience, Reddy confirmed she will no longer continue in the chair position. 

NZR released its latest transitional proposal – which includes the need to include gender and ethnic diversity – to alter the board structure in late March. The Herald understands it does not have unanimous board support following a 7-2 vote in favour of the change. 

This article was originally published on the NZ Herald here.