Culture, Communications, Welsh Language, Sport, and International Relations Committee

Good morning, everybody. My name is Richard Collier-Keywood, and I chair the Welsh Rugby Union.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. Thank you so much, Richard. And Alison.

Diolch yn fawr. Bore da, bawb. I'm Alison Thorne, I'm the senior independent director for the Welsh Rugby Union. I chair the people, culture and governance committee, and I joined in mid 2023, post the governance changes that 90 per cent of community clubs voted for, for greater independence on the Welsh Rugby Union board.

Thank you so much. And Geraint.

Geraint John, community director for the WRU.

You're all very welcome, and thank you for joining us. We'll move immediately to questions, if that's okay.

Richard, you told the Welsh Affairs Committee in Westminster recently that you felt you had sufficient support amongst fans, players and clubs to take Welsh rugby into the future. In light of the extraordinary general meeting that's been called, do you still think this is the case?

Let me answer that in a few different ways, perhaps, but I'll try and be brief. First of all, I want to say that we entirely respect the EGM process and we will be complying with our obligations in that regard in full. Secondly, I was, I think, brought in as an independent chair for the Welsh Rugby Union on a mandate of change, and change is never easy. We recognise that, and we're in the midst of significant change.

If you remember, back in 2023, the areas of change that were particularly highlighted, both by the BBC programme and by the Dame Anne Rafferty report, were: governance, and we have professionalised governance in the Welsh Rugby Union; there was culture, well you're probably never done with culture, but we have made a significant difference in terms of role modelling behaviours and picking up where there's poor behaviour; thirdly, the women's game, we've made significant advances in investment in the women's game and continue to wish to do so going forward; and finally, in finance, and this is probably well documented by now and you're probably sick of me reminding you of it, but we breached our covenants on 30 June 2023, 31 December 2023, and 30 June 2024 as well. We are now on a stable footing. We have created an additional £8 million of profits. Our profits grew from £25 million to £32 million for the year ending 30 June 2025, and we are trading above that level in the current year.

My mandate was change. I think we're in the course of delivering that change. We recognise that is very painful, but we are committed to delivering that change. That's why you asked me to do this job. You didn't ask me to do this job to keep the status quo. But we do recognise that's painful for a number of people involved in our system.

Thank you for that. I wonder if I could ask you what you think the effect would be if the EGM proposals were voted through, and if there is a message that you would want to give to fans and clubs today.

Thank you. I think the first thing would be that it really feels like a step backwards when you look at some of the requests in that letter. We're not paying consultants to do our jobs. We are skilled, professional, independent directors and administrators. In rugby, we've brought back Steve Tandy as a brilliant men's coach with exactly the right culture in terms of collaboration across the major teams. We brought back Sean Lynn for the women—again, a proud Welshman—a real investment there in who was probably the top premiership women's rugby coach for a number of years in his role at Gloucester-Hartpury. So, the first message is we're not paying consultants to do our jobs. We're doing our jobs and hiring the right people.

The second message is that we have professionalised governance. It would be a totally backward step if you effectively reverse the changes that took place in the EGM in March 2023 and brought in an opaque group of people to do the jobs that we are doing.

opaque group of people to do the jobs that we are doing.

The third step—or the third point, probably—is that we have genuine concerns about the financial system that we have now built. You heard me talk earlier about the very significant financial difficulties that the WRU was having. Well, within the last two months, we've completed the re-financing, which includes HSBC and Goldman Sachs, and that has given us £60 million over the course of the next three years to invest in Welsh rugby. And when we announced the changes—. You'll remember there were two broad changes, just to simplify really, really clearly. The first is that we have made a commitment to go from four to three teams, and I recognise the controversy attached to that, but we really need to concentrate our resources on fewer professional clubs to make our clubs better and to make the system work better. And the second big change was we announced a £28 million investment across the grass-roots to semi-professional game, including up to the Super Rygbi Cymru league, over the next five years. And that will not be able to be done without the continued support of our sponsors, of our bankers, of our media partners. And I do think that all those people want to see good governance at the WRU; they want to see professional non-execs involved in the WRU, and they want to see that stability that that brings in the longer term for the sustainability of Welsh rugby.

Thank you, Richard. I have a number of Members who are keen to ask questions. I'll go to Heledd firstly, and then to Alun. Heledd.

Thank you. I just want to get back to the Chair's first question, really, just in terms of your thoughts. Obviously, managing change means bringing people with you—something that doesn't seem to be happening at the moment. Do you have any regrets about the process to date?

That's a really good question. I've reflected on that on many, many occasions. The thing we've really struggled to do is to bring the professional clubs with us on this journey, and that's a fair reflection, I think. To some extent, obviously, people are worried, but we're caught in this difficult dilemma of having to operate fairly and equally with everybody, because we are the regulator for rugby in Wales and therefore we have obligations under competition laws, and that requires us to act step by step, and properly and fairly at each point in time. And being fair across the board, if we're going from four to three, means ultimately that that's a very open process, and ultimately one club will lose out by definition. And it's very hard to take everybody with you at that point in time. So, yes, that's my big reflection.

And the way in which professional rugby is organised in Wales, through the joining together at the hip, as it were, of the four professional clubs in the Welsh Rugby Union, originally did not serve us very well, because the four professional clubs were worried that we weren't making enough money. We were worried that any money we did make was just divided equally and we had no opportunity to invest. So, we've tried to break some of those ties in moving to the new professional rugby agreement, which I think will be a very, very good thing in the future.

But those things are hard. And they're hard because everyone seems to want to look backwards, as opposed to—. History and heritage are incredibly important, and I recognise that, but my role has really been to try and get everyone facing forwards, to look at the future, and that's just been incredibly difficult to do in the goldfish bowl that is Welsh rugby.

Just before Heledd goes on, I think Alison wanted to come in on this.

Thank you. Diolch, Delyth. We wanted to also talk about the fact that, as a board and as an executive, we have district meetings on a regular basis, monthly, and there are about nine districts across Wales. And that's our opportunity to really listen effectively. So, I've been to about four—five, it would have been, if Swansea had let me in—over the last six weeks. And clearly, we're hearing the story that we need to improve our communication. So, we absolutely acknowledge, as you say, that through a change programme, and all the things that Richard said, how challenging change is, it is about our ability to get out, to listen and to sometimes reassure.

So, my experience of those four district meetings is, yes, I've had challenge, quite rightly, and we've been able to allay some concerns. We've been able to learn something that we didn't know previously and why people are thinking of those concerns, and we've been able to make the changes. So, I think, at the heart of every change programme, it is about winning the hearts and minds, as you say. And we all acknowledge that we can do far more, and we're trying to do more, in that engagement with the district teams, across Geraint's team and our team. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. I just want to reflect, really, because you mentioned the goldfish bowl, but, actually, when you think about Wales, the fact that we are a small nation and that people care passionately about rugby—. I've heard people say, yes, there needs to be change, but they criticise a lack of transparency, a lack of engagement, despite you saying it's been the biggest engagement ever. It doesn't seem that people feel they've had a voice in shaping those plans or understanding why you've got to the position you have in terms of the reduction. So, are there any reflections there or lessons learnt about whether you need to relook or re-engage, because the fans are speaking for themselves, not attending matches for the six nations and so on? People are really, really angry. So, obviously, something's failed here. It's not just about the scrutiny, but it's about their feeling of engagement in this process.

Quite rightly, as you say, there are fans, there are clubs who feel like that, but there's also a very strong number of clubs who don't feel like that. So, when we're in the districts, we hear both sides of those elements. The consultation, again, we definitely could improve on that, because a consultation is a consultation. It was across 32 different bodies, different people, with experts to help inform the decision making. It wasn't a vote, for want of a better description. Probably, again, we could have explained that more fully. So, we had the consultation, which clearly worked with all the people impacted with the game. And then we also had the public survey, where we had 7,000 respondents. The overwhelming message from all of that was that change is needed. There was not a commonality necessarily about what that change would look like, but there was definitely a cry, 'We need to change, particularly in the pathways, particularly in the academies, to ensure a more successful professional game.'

Thank you. I think Geraint wanted to come in.

No, Alison's answered the question. When you talk about going out to the people, we have to learn from what people are telling us right now. I think that's hugely important, and perhaps we need to make improvements for the future. We need to look at that. But we have made changes, we've made changes because that's what people have told us, and Alison just said and Richard said earlier about what we're doing in the community game. The clubs have asked us what we're doing to help them. So, we have put things like that in place for the next five years about—

—the new club investment model, like how do we change our governance of clubs, club development plans, business development plans, and get more across equality in our governance of our clubs, get more diverse views and thoughts in our clubs. So, we've listened in that aspect there.

And then if I return to speaking Welsh, because that's important, to say what we are going to do to ensure that players who are playing the game between perhaps 12 and 18, both boys and girls, how they can then move on to the professional game, how we can help them. As I've said, we've spoken with people out there. We do want to make the changes: the national academy, ensuring that every player across the whole of Wales—in north Wales, west Wales, every boy and every girl—that there's an opportunity for them to have better coaches. We need to improve the coaches and what's there.

So, we have listened to people too. We know, as you said, Heledd, that people are talking a lot about us going down to three from four regions— that's what people are talking about. If we have learned a little, it's that perhaps we haven't spoken enough about what else we're doing to help the game for the future, and that is a lesson for us as a union too.

Is there an intention, therefore, to change what you're doing right now, because one of the things that people have written to us as a committee about is the need for transparency about why, what was the modelling, what were the various options that you looked at? What's the evidence that demonstrates that this will improve the numbers coming through our communities and will strengthen grass-roots rugby? So, is there an intention to respond to this? Not just to learn lessons—and I would like to know what those lessons are, by the way—but what do you intend to do now to bring people with you?

As Alison said earlier, we have been out there across the whole of Wales over the past three months to discuss what we're doing. We've also listened, of course. We are going to change. We think that the direction of travel is the right one to help children in our communities, to help children to come through. That's important to us, and we think that that's the right way to go. People have told us that, and it's important that the information that's been fed to us is what helps us to make the decision.

When we initially began, we were only going to have perhaps two professional teams, but we've listened to people. People were saying that we have to change, that things have to change, that we need to listen to them and that's why we've gone from two to three. We think that having three is the best way ahead when we look at the numbers playing the game, and when we look perhaps at what happens in other nations too; that's important to us too. So, how many people are living in Wales? That's important too.

So, we've looked at things in the round in terms of how many players we have, both male and female, how many people live in Wales, in order to ensure that it's—. And also, why are we making these changes? We want these changes so that—. When you look at the game on Saturday against Scotland, Wales was all over that. We were so close to winning. Why are we making the changes? We want to win games—not just the men's team, but the women's team too for the future. We want to ensure that we're in the top five in the world for the future, and that we do well in the world cup too.

So, we have to make the changes. We haven't done that. Perhaps we should have done it years ago, but we didn't. Now is the time to make those changes, in order to ensure that the game is right for men and women for the future, and to ensure that our national teams, both the men and women, are successful in the future too.

Thank you for that, Geraint. We're moving on. I'll invite Alun to come in first, and then I'll go to Lee.

The committee understands that change is difficult. The committee understands that. Lee Waters changed the speed limit in Wales. It's hard. I tried to reform local government. It's tough, and people you expect to support you sometimes turn out to be your greatest opponents, frankly, and you hear a lot about people second-hand. It's a hard, hard task. It's much easier to manage decline than to actually deliver change, and I think some of the criticism that I see, particularly online, of the WRU is grotesquely unfair and uncalled for, and I think a lot of people take the opportunity sometimes just to throw stones. I think that is unfair.

However, I find myself conflicted here, because I'm here representing Blaenau Gwent, a member of a committee, but I've got a ticket for the Italy game, I’ve got a season ticket at Ebbw Vale and I desperately want this game to succeed. It's a part of who I am; it's a part of my identity. And so, when I ask you questions about what you are seeking to achieve, it isn't as somebody who wants to throw stones at you, wants you to fail. I still remember what it was like leaving the stadium in 2005 with tears in my eyes, and that enormous outpouring of joy in Cardiff. It was the most amazing day of my life, and it really was fantastic, and I want to see those days back. I want to see my son experience that, and my concern is that, at the moment, there's very little chance of that happening.

I want to ask you, Richard, about your approach, because you described the alternative in answer to the question about the EGM as a group of opaque people taking charge. People I talk to think you're pretty opaque, if I'm quite clear with you. And how did you feel facing fans after the France game, walking out of the stadium? How did you feel when you were walking out of the stadium, when you were sat there watching the way that that game unfolded, or in Twickenham? I want to know how you felt, and I want to know how you felt when you heard the anger from people around you in the stadium, because I think people want to feel that actually you're on their side.

That's a good question. So, I feel—. I mean, I've been to almost every—well, I've been to just about every home game apart from the French one. So, I just want to be clear: I wasn't there; I had family commitments. But I feel totally gutted when Wales lose. I've had debentures in the Principality Stadium for years and years and years, and I understand that emotion. I've been there with my kids through thick and thin, through the brilliant years, the 2010s to 2019, and I go out in Cardiff and I'm there celebrating with everybody and it's pure joy. I sit in the president's box now with my head in my hands, if I'm honest with you. And I take this, I am the chair, so I have responsibility for everything—the on-pitch stuff, all the way through to the finances, the safeguarding in the districts—I take all that really, really seriously. But you'll know, from a sports perspective, that we need to rebuild. And we struggled for years and years to put money into the game. And when I came on board, the first decision, substantive decision, that we took together as a board was to form the SRC—it's been talked about for a while.

And the second set of decisions we took was to put the pathways back in and to invest money in those. And you're right, you want to see your son play rugby—that's 'the proud dad' across Wales—and I understand that, but you've got to have the infrastructure in place, you've got to have the systems in place, you've got to have the coaches in place. And honestly, when I came in and looked around, there wasn't much of that there that was good, and people like John Alder and others, and Geraint from the executive, have done a super job of trying to rebuild some of that over the last two to three years, and that takes time. But, yes, I mean, you look at me and sometimes, the camera points at you and you're just going, 'Oh'—it's hard.

And equally, I think our boys have done us proud. When Abi's not been there, I've been down in the dressing rooms with the players, and you feel the sense of responsibility they have, and we so want to see them win. And we were so close against Scotland and we led for 75 minutes, or whatever it was, just not the last five—

Yes, I get that—

It's painful, and you see the pain on the players' faces. They want to win for Wales and it's just—.

Okay, I think we get the sense of what you're trying to say. When you attended this Parliament about a year ago, you had a briefing for Members here, and I think most of us who attended that briefing felt, 'Let the ball run; let's see what's going to happen and let's see how the next 12 months unfold.' I felt the decision taking was over too extended a period of time—I think I said that to you at the time—and I felt that a quicker decision would probably be easier for everybody. But I think all of us were interested, as Members, to allow the process to unfold. And so the process has unfolded, and my concern now is that you've lost the argument, if I'm quite honest with you. I cannot easily think of anybody I know who has an involvement with the game, who are the people who are attending games of rugby on a weekly basis, who actually think that what you're proposing now with the professional game is the best way forward. And so I think you failed to win the argument, if I'm quite honest with you, Richard. And sometimes you do—I failed to win the argument with local government; I still believe that 22 councils is madness, but I lost the argument. And I think the key thing for us now is to recognise that rugby, the world of Welsh rugby, does not support the reduction to three professional teams. And I think the responsibility for the WRU and for you, in a leadership position, is to recognise, as Jim Callaghan, I think—Lee's going to correct me here—said,

'When you see an elephant on your doorstep, you know that it’s there.'

John Morris.

John Morris, yes, in 1979. The elephant is here, Richard. Understand that the elephant is sitting on your doorstep, move on and find a different way forward. Is that a realistic alternative now?

Look, it is an alternative, and I totally respect your view in terms of where Welsh rugby is. I think it's worth reflecting on the feedback we get from the districts, because I don't necessarily recognise everything you're saying there, I'm afraid.

Okay.

I think that there are different views out there. We did put out a consultation document of, I think, 90-odd pages when we started the consultation back in October, and that set out pretty clearly the reasons why the number of professional teams should be reduced. I'm not going to necessarily reiterate those arguments here. And obviously, as Geraint said very eloquently earlier, we got from a situation where we were suggesting an optimal system of two back to a situation where there was really strong feedback that three was the right answer. Three is a hard number for us to manage in relation to our commitment to the United Rugby Championship, but we chose to take that feedback and to work with URC, which is still going on, to create the fact that we could put three Welsh teams into the URC. The benefits of that are very significant. I'm not going to go through it in detail, but No. 1, financially, we're able to put enough money into our teams to make them competitive. The question is: do you want four teams, which struggle and have struggled to compete in the URC, or do you want three teams that will get—at least some of them will—to the final stages and the knock-out stages in the URC? And secondly, the feedback—. I am not a coach or an expert in that, but what Dave Reddin tells me and what Steve Tandy tells me is that they want the best players to play together more closely for longer periods of time, in pods that make a difference, and that's what we have to try to achieve, as opposed to them being spread out over four teams, by the way, where we have—we're paying for a system with quite a lot of non-Welsh-qualified players. So, we pull that down.

The board got to a unanimous position on the three teams, and that board includes some people who are steeped in Welsh rugby, including our president, Terry Cobner, including Jamie Roberts, including our women's players around that team, and they understand what this all means. So, I'm trying to chair this and bring all of the views together, and the board was unanimous in this view of where we got to. So, am I inclined to throw that away two months into its implementation? Honestly, probably not, because I think you asked me to bring this change so that Welsh rugby would have a strong, proud, sustainable future, and we've just started that process. And so I thank you for giving us the benefit of the year; we might need another year.

But surely the alternative to what you're proposing isn't to reduce the number of people playing rugby, professional rugby, which is what you're proposing, but to actually grow the game in Wales. There are lots of children in Blaenau Gwent who want to play rugby, who want the opportunity to go through that pyramid, and surely the way to improve the national game is not to diminish rugby, but to actually open it up and increase it and grow the game in Wales rather than reducing the game in Wales.

And Geraint should answer that in a second, but we totally agree with that, and that's a key part of our strategy from a participation viewpoint. But the fact remains that, today, we have four teams that don't have enough money to play at the competitive level that they're being asked to play at, and we do not have the finances to both fund all four teams and to fund the necessary rugby infrastructure within Wales to enable exactly what you're asking us to do there, to take the participation all the way through to the elite professional rugby. Geraint, it's probably good for you to comment.

I think that Alison wanted to come in first and then Geraint. Alison.

It's really building on what Richard was saying—diolch, Alun—around the fact that this is about the prioritisation of money. We have a certain pot. It's the same for all of you as politicians: how do we prioritise? The challenge that we debated around the board, as Richard articulated, is that we could have four teams massively invested, but we could have no national academy, no people development, no coach development, and so it's this balance of the prioritisation, and these are, as you've said, challenging decisions to make. And armed with all of the information from a rugby perspective, from a finance perspective, the balanced view is to—. And this is listening. So, listening to everything from the consultation, it's: your pathways need fixing. That was the overriding message that came from our learnings from that consultation. And therefore we have to fix that, and the way that we can do that is that we also have to then take the difficult decision about the number of regions, alongside all the things that Richard has led on in terms of the finance and the refinancing. I would also say about an amazing new contract for the Principality Stadium to enable us to try and generate even more moneys. So, we're not looking to be in a standstill position; we're looking to keep growing that financial sustainability, but we've had to prioritise the choices across that whole breadth. Thank you.

Okay, thank you. Geraint, you wanted to come in.

Thank you. I was there in 2005 as well, Alun. It was a fantastic day, and I remember other games as well, so I appreciate those comments as well. And it means the same to me: I was brought up on rugby—I never went anywhere else. I was brought up on rugby, every single Saturday. My mum and dad did the same.

You're right about growth, and it's vitally important as well, and I think we probably could sit here—. You're going to have to excuse me, Delyth, if I do discuss this a little bit too far. Please let me know and I will stop. Because you're right in terms of the community game and the growth, and that's what we want, and we're doing exceptionally well in that. We can't hide that fact, and you go out in the community rugby, and I go out every single Saturday and watch games, the local people go there, and we want to increase the numbers, and we're doing that at this moment in time. We do have a large number of young boys playing the game, and our young girls coming into the game—there's a massive increase in that and it's fantastic to see. It is huge.

And part of this programme—a little bit of what Alison talked about and Richard talked about—is, yes, there are financial elements in there as well: how do we make everything sustainable, not just our professional games, but our community clubs? You know, the community clubs—you talked about Ebbw Vale, and you talked about Newbridge, and the clubs in Blaenau Gwent and everywhere across Wales. How do we help them to become sustainable? But it's also about rugby. Let's not forget why we're here. It's about getting people on the field and playing the game, but also about all the local people in the communities who have a fantastic experience with the game.

So, yes, we're trying to grow the game, but I think one of the things that we've also done in terms of the growth of the game—. I think one area that we haven't actually worked really well in is the alignment from community to the professional element of the game. So, in Ebbw Vale, for example, in SRC—I think that is probably a gap that we haven't achieved, and I think right now in terms of again looking at the plan, and people saying, 'You haven't got a plan', yes, we want to develop our coaches as part of the plan. We want to develop our player development centres, so that every boy and every girl, as I said, across Wales has that opportunity. We want to then—. The step-up from community all the way to professional rugby—that is a big step these days, and we've got to remember what the modern game is all about. It's not about maybe when I played, years ago, it's how we overcome those steps. So, our semi-professional rugby is vitally important for the next step, and putting investment into that, into those clubs, the clubs with history and heritage, is going to be vitally important, and not just in the men's game, but also in the women's game as well.

So, just very quickly on that one, in terms of the women's game and the Celtic Challenge—in terms of that, we've got a professional game in the women's game. Our Celtic Challenge teams are likely to be in the play-off semifinals of this new Celtic Challenge competition through that investment. So, yes, there's a financial element to it, but I agree with you on the rugby. And we do need to grow, and where that will be in years to come may mean people who are part of the Welsh Rugby Union and the board may have to look at the fantastic number of players that we are developing right now, and what are the opportunities moving forward.

Thank you for that.

I have requests for very brief supplementaries from Mick and Heledd, and then we're going to move on to some questions from Lee. So, Mick, firstly.

I just wanted to ask a question about the point you're making on growth, because when you gave evidence to the Westminster select committee, you said that this

'is not only the affordable way forward, but the way forward that will enable our rugby to improve',

and you did not feel you had enough players for four teams. Now, club rugby is the foundation of the whole of rugby. It seems to me that the proposal to move from four to three is actually consolidating almost the lack of growth. How do you see growth actually occurring if, effectively, you're taking away what is a quarter of the professional side and the ability to provide more opportunities within that, because it seems to me there's a contradiction there? What is the way forward on that?

Apologies if I may not have explained it—. In terms of growth, we look at it from a young age, the growth of players. I understand in terms of opportunities. I think, on opportunities, and how do you become a professional player, when you look at the numbers in terms of that, people always give us information, 'Ireland have got four, look at them, why can't you have four?' Look at the different populations. We're not the largest population in Wales, just over 3 million. We're probably outside the top 10 in terms of the top 10 teams in the world in terms of population numbers. It's interesting, in terms of the number of people who play within Wales, we're actually in the top three when you look at the population capital index across all the teams in the world—in the top 10.

But I think, in terms of growth, we've got to work out right now, in terms of players—. We've got a large number of players playing in the community. How do we develop them to play professional rugby? Richard mentioned earlier the number of overseas players. We've got over 30 players non-Welsh playing in our four professional teams. That may be stopping it. That's because there may not be enough elite players to come through our system. So, we've got to work really hard over the next number of years on how do we grow the number of players and how do we transition them to our professional game moving forward.

Right now, when we look at the numbers and look at the players coming through the system, through population, through the data that we're having, the insight, the number of players playing the game—. And we've done a lot of comparisons with other countries of the world, but we've got to do what's right for Wales. So, let's not forget that element as well. Three was the area that probably, as Richard said, and Alison said, through consultation with our professional teams, through expert opinion—we talked about consultants earlier—in terms of what is happening in other countries, how do we measure ourselves against other countries—. Three, we felt, was the optimum model, right now, to make sure that we've got three teams that would be majorly competitive, but also, underneath that, we'd have a major semi-professional element there. So, hopefully that explains a little bit, but, right now, we feel that's the right model for us to be successful on the professional stage now.

But in terms of growth, yes, as Alun said, we need to continue to try and grow our players, and our younger players, through our clubs and schools, and make sure that the fantastic volunteers that are out there who are helping us in this area are supported as well to help us with that growth.

Thank you for that. A brief question from Heledd, then we'll move to Lee.

Diolch. I just wanted to pick up on the point made by you previously, Alison, where you alluded to the extension of stadium name and rights with Principality. There's not been a disclosure in terms of how much that is worth. Is there any intention of being transparent about that? Because one of the questions that's been raised, obviously, if you look at comparable deals on stadiums, is that that could make a difference in terms of the financial viability of four regions.

I was referring, actually, to the Aramark deal, sorry—

Right.

Apologies. I'll come back to you on the Principality, but if I can just explain the other one, which is that that was a full tender process that hadn't been changed at the stadium for over 20 years. Therefore, that's been able to generate considerable investment, and, hopefully, for all of us, enhancing that customer experience, from little things like the queues for the beer or the Guinness, through to how does it feel sitting in the stadium. So, that's one of the big changes. They've also committed to capital investment, to support changing the stadium and the technology. As a customer experience, for all of us, we go to other stadiums and have things on our app and things like that. So, that's a massive step change for the customer experience, for the fan, and the supporters.

On the Principality, we were delighted that they chose to extend. We have to go back to various hiccups, even in my two and a half years of the women's contract, and sponsors thinking, 'Do I really want to be part of the WRU?', go back to the BBC Wales programme, and many sponsors were thinking of leaving. So, we're not in a backdrop of huge demand to be sponsors, because of the brand elements and the concerns that have come through. On the full details, I will refer to my colleagues on whether we can share anything, because it's obviously commercially sensitive. But I will find out what we can submit as evidence to support that question.

Thank you, Alison.

My apologies, I haven't got it with me now.

Diolch, Alison. Thank you. We'll move to questions from Lee, and then from Gareth.

As we're trading rugby experiences, I was forced to do rugby in school, and I took it as a success to come off the field at Ammanford comp with a clean kit. So, I don't share the emotional attachment, but I represent an area where rugby is very important. I think of Hendy or Llangennech, or Kidwelly or Trimsaran—this matters. I'd like to direct a question at the Chair, if I might, because, obviously, reducing the number of teams was always going to be very, very difficult. And you said, I think, in your opening remarks, that openness and transparency were key. I think one of the reasons why—. Trust is easy to lose, but hard to build, and there's a feeling that you have lost trust because you've not been seen to be fair and transparent, particularly to the teams in the west, where there's a feeling that you have given a guarantee that there will be a team in Cardiff, but west of Cardiff, where rugby means a lot, there is no such guarantee. Your role, I think, as a fair broker in all of this has lost a lot of credibility. You're now facing the situation where there's a head of steam for keeping four teams, which, from the position of your analysis and the basis on which you were brought in, would be a disaster for you and the rest of the board. So, what do you say to the supporters who think that you are not playing fair here, you are favouring Cardiff over the rest? And how do you win back that trust, if you can?

Thank you for the question. Let me try and answer it in a series of pieces so everyone understands and has the same set of facts. As Alison said earlier, we were trying to turn up at Swansea, but were asked not to go. So, I'm really grateful we get this opportunity to set out clearly and transparently what the situation is.

Probably the starting point for this is that, as a board, in October, we made the decision to go to three teams. We also did the analysis, which Geraint's referred to earlier, around population density, around rugby-playing populations, around where schools are, where universities are, where basically the game thrives. And we made quite a difficult decision as a board that we wanted to go with three, and we've called them 'licences'. One in the capital, one in the east, and one in the west. So that's the first thing I'll put on the table.

The second thing is we did not choose to take the easy route to go to three. At the time, back in April 2025, we had a strategy, very clearly, of having four teams. Unfortunately, Helford Capital did not fulfil their owner obligations at Cardiff and, in order to keep that strategy whole, we decided we had to rescue Cardiff, and there were very compelling financial reasons why we had to rescue Cardiff. The whole rugby ecosystem was in danger of being brought down if we didn't, to be clear. So, we rescued Cardiff at that point in time, which kept us with four teams. And that was our strategy back in April 2025, very clearly.

However, that meant that we then owned one of the four teams, and that wasn't a part of our strategy at all. It's not what we wanted to do, and we've since put Cardiff on the market, as it were. But we've tried to do that in a way that's preserved the value in Cardiff. And, to put this into context for Members, Cardiff is sitting on our balance sheet at a value of, broadly, £10 million of goodwill, which is about a third of our net assets. So it's a really significant thing for the Welsh Rugby Union, both to have done and to hold. So we put Cardiff up for sale. That was a wide process. We got it down to two bidders, and the board in January this year looked at the two final bids.

We realised how controversial this was, and so we actually had an outside lawyer sit in on the final debate that the executive had between the two bids, and the view was very clearly in favour of one of those bids. That bid, as everyone knows, was by Y11, who also own the Ospreys. We had to do a bit of scrambling in the background to understand whether it was possible, within the rugby ecosystem, for Y11 to own the two clubs, because, obviously, that was an important consideration as well. And it is possible for Y11 to own two clubs, and there are obviously parallels in relation to, I guess, Ireland, Scotland, et cetera, where clubs have a greater degree of common ownership. So that's the next thing that happened.

The assumption that was then made, which I'm really grateful to have this opportunity to be really, really clear about, was that Ospreys was going to be the club that was 'killed off', to use an expression that's been thrown at me many, many times. That is not the case in terms of what will necessarily happen as a result of Y11 owning two clubs. There is a totally separate process that the Welsh Rugby Union is going through—well, not totally separate; it is integrated, but it is a separate process—of how we decide to award the licences.

In order to put Cardiff up for sale, we've had to make a commitment to the people who bid for Cardiff that we would award the capital licence to that bidder, and you'd expect us to do that to preserve the value associated with a capital licence. We have not decided on the process as to how we will award the east licence. And, of course, everyone assumes that that east licence is going to Dragons. I assume that, if we carry out a competitive process, that Dragons would have a very significant advantage in getting that east licence. And we're not trying to put that in doubt, but I'm just saying that we are governed by competition law, and we have to carry out each step of the process in a fair way.

You then come to the west licence. With the west licence, there are two professional teams, as we know, operating in the west today. We have Scarlets and we have Ospreys. Ospreys is owned by Y11. It will continue to be owned by Y11. Scarlets has a multitude of predominantly individual owners, and they operate in Llanelli. And there is one west licence. Going forward, I expect that we will carry out a fair and transparent process to determine who gets that west licence. We have not done that yet, and we want to be very clear that we will carry out that process, because there may be some conditions that we want to put into that west licence, such as where rugby is played, i.e. it must be played across the west region, for example.

Then, the final bit of the equation, just to be very clear, is that we have a long-term commitment as the Welsh Rugby Union to put four clubs into the URC. We have not yet reached a compromise with the URC in terms of how we go to the three clubs. So, we have an obligation, actually, to maintain four clubs for the foreseeable future. But that doesn't take away from our decision that we've made—and you heard the financial challenges—that despite the hugely increased money we've got coming through, we were putting—.

I'll just put these figures on the table so people understand a bit of the challenge. We were providing squad costs of about £4.5 million to the Welsh teams back in, I think, 2023, and that was against probably £7 million or £8 million in teams that they were competing against. You just can't compete with that difference. So, although we're making more money and we want to put more money, the challenge is do we put all of that, as we said before, into four teams? Or do we build this infrastructure within Wales that means that your son will be able to play with a brilliant coach within an hour of a player development centre, whether he lives in west Wales, north Wales, south Wales, Gwent, wherever.

We made the decision that, no, in the medium term, as soon as we sorted ourselves out with URC, we'll go to three teams. We will carry out some formal process in terms of awarding the west licence. We just have not had the time to do that yet. Remember, we made this decision at the very end of October. We're now three months into that process—get my timings right—and we are going to carry that out properly and with due transparency. Sorry for the long answer, but I think it was quite important to set that out.

Thank you for doing that. But your case there is essentially a plea for more trust, and it seems to me that you've used a lot of that capital, and there's a question mark whether there's enough left to take you through that process. You're joining us from arbitration in London with the Scarlets; there's an EGM being called. Clearly, you've lost the room with a lot of the important players here, and you're going to need that trust to get you through, as you said, the next stages of the process.

I just have a question for Alison Thorne as a board member; it wouldn't be fair to put this to anybody else. In terms of reflection on the governance changes that have taken place—and you've talked us through the situation you inherited and the need for change—there's a case being made by Hayley Parsons, the former board member of Cardiff, and others, that it's important that the leadership has credibility amongst the stakeholders, and by choosing both a chief executive and a chair without a history in the game—. Richard Collier-Keywood's answers this morning have primarily been from a financial point of view; his management consultant hat has been very apparent, and that is, arguably, a strength, but it does mean it's a little cold-blooded for many of the fans out there.

So, I just want your reflections as a board member on whether or not the model is right that both the chief executive and the chair can come from a background that is not attached to the stakeholders, especially when you rely on the goodwill of the stakeholders to make that case for change. Because, quite clearly, the trust is thin and it's easily eroded, as we're seeing.

Yes. All appointments are now viewed with hindsight, and I think it's really important that—. You know, board members, we're not there to win a personality contest. It's not about personalities; it's really about the right skills and the right experience. And so, having been interviewed—. So, as part of the interview process at the time, as Richard and other directors, I had four interviews; there was a really robust panel, led by one of the council—

With respect, that's not my question.

Sorry. My apologies, Lee.

My question is—. We're treating this as a board of a large organisation, and the processes you mentioned are appropriate for that. But this is not a large business organisation, this is also a sporting body, where stakeholders and the credibility with them is vital. And I'm asking you, with the reflection of the experience of hindsight, the fact of going for a leadership without roots within that sporting community, if we're now seeing the weakness of that approach and whether or not that needs reflecting on?

I think, when you look at—. Again, this is why I say it's not about individuals and personality. I think you have to look at the board in its widest context. It was, at that time, and still will always be, about a diverse board. So, when we look at the diversity of the board, we've got—I'm going to get my numbers right; bear with me—11 who are Welsh, one who is English. We've got a mix of people who live in Wales and live outside of Wales.

I'm talking about the leadership.

We are the leadership.

Really?

Yes. The board is the leadership.

Because the perception is that this is very much being led by the chair, particularly, with the chief executive falling closely behind.

But there is—. That's the whole point of governance, that these decisions are taken by the board; and the ones that we've just spoken about today have been unanimous decisions by the board.

So, you think the model's fine?

So, I think the model of having a diverse board is absolutely fine, and what you will find—

You're ducking my question, with respect.

Gosh. My apologies, Lee.

My question is: isn't it important for the leadership to have credibility?

Yes, it is important for leadership to have credibility.

And is that present?

Yes, it is, across the board.

Okay. Thank you.

We will move on. Gareth has a question and then we'll move on to another question from Alun. Just to let everyone know, we have around seven and a half minutes left of our session. So, firstly, the question from Gareth, who hasn't asked a question yet, and then to Alun.

Thank you very much, Chair. Good morning, everybody. As the only member of the committee representing a north Wales region, I will just shoehorn in Rhyl rugby club, in my constituency, which has been noted as one of the most successful rugby clubs in terms of the clubhouse and its facilities within most of Wales. So, just a quick note to that in opening.

Obviously, we've covered a lot of areas already. I just wanted to dig slightly deeper into the representation on the WRU board in terms of the western representation, from areas such as Swansea, Neath and Bridgend, and what voice do they have on the board. And, as a second to that question, I have to expand slightly on what Lee was asking, in asking what professional rugby experience do the chair and the CEO bring to these decisions, and do they feel there should be more representation on the board from people with a professional rugby background, given the nature of the decisions that are made and the nature of it being a sporting body, which can be successful, or more successful, and bring what goes on at a board level and make that transpire into success on the rugby pitch, which we all want to see come back in the way that's been noted already—you know, your 2005s, your 2008s. My favourite moment, personally, was the last-minute victory against Scotland at the millennium stadium in 2010. But how do we make any decision that's made by the board transpire into success on the pitch, which the people of Wales so rightly deserve and the team deserve because of our stature and the prowess that we have as a nation, in terms of its rugby profile?

Can I—?

Alison.

Yes, thank you. Thank you. We are a diverse board and we do have professional rugby representation on that board. So, the beauty of the board has been, from the membership—so, the council members who are on the board—there are four people who are all through community rugby or are players. And we have two female professional rugby players, 70 and 50 caps between them. We also have Jamie Roberts, who represents professional rugby. As a standing, the independent chair of the professional rugby body also is an ex-rugby player too. So, we have a very strong rugby presence around the board, and we have very robust discussions. As we're hearing here, the point of a diverse board is that we all come with a different lens, a different background, a different lived experience, different skills that we're bringing into it. I'm a lifetime supporter, from the time my dad was a groundsman at the arms park, and I've been in the tunnel at age 14, 15. And so we all have a different lens on rugby: some are playing, some are supporting, some are enabling success because they've got coaching experience. And so it's really important that we have that breadth of diversity across the board. So, it creates very challenging and very dynamic discussions, but that do result in unamit—I can't say that word, sorry—unanimous decisions as a consequence.

Thank you, Alison.

Geraint, do you want to just come in briefly?

I will be quick. Just to also answer here, in terms of performance and knowledge and expertise, when we did go through the consultation process, it wasn't just with the professional rugby teams and also the communities; there was an independent group of people who were high-level performance people, who also understood the Welsh culture and the Welsh sporting environment as well. They were engaged in part of the consultation, and perhaps people aren't aware of that.

Diolch, Geraint. And forgive me—

But you do note—. Sorry, if I may. You do note, though, that that is quite a broad criticism that is had. Take the personalities out of it completely, it's just that, in terms of the professional rugby experience that's displayed from the chair, or the lack of professional rugby experience experienced by the chair and the CEO, would you note that that is a concern amongst many rugby fans and people across Wales generally?

I think we would note from the EGM request and, therefore, we respect that democratic process of listening to those, and we'll follow that process completely through in the right governance. Thank you.

Okay. Diolch.

Diolch.

Diolch, Gareth. Finally—. Well, Mick has one very brief question, but I'll go to Alun firstly and then to Mick. So, Alun.

Yes. I'm grateful to you all this morning for the time you've taken. I was really fascinated by an answer from Richard to a previous question about how this new framework would operate. So, you'd have a licence in the west—presumably that is the Scarlets—called 'the Scarlets', and then they would play in a number of different venues across the west, and I presume the west starts in Bridgend and goes across to St Helen's, perhaps the Gnoll, and then across to Parc y Scarlets and the rest of it. And I'm just thinking that this is madness. The idea that you're going to have a game involving the Scarlets at home in St Helen's, it's bizarre. I don't understand how you believe that Scarlets supporters—. Lee's a better—. Even with his experience of rugby, he's in a better position than me to understand the Scarlets' mind, but I don't believe that Scarlets fans are going to cross the Loughor to watch the Scarlets play at home in St Helen's. I certainly don't believe that anybody in Swansea or Bridgend is going to go to St Helen's to watch the Scarlets play in St Helen's. It just feels to me that you're operating in a parallel universe here.

I'll quickly interject and then let Richard—. What Richard was outlining were possibilities; there are no decisions made. There are no decisions made other than that there will be a team in the west and there will be a team in the east.

I will just ask Richard to respond to this, and then we will go to Mick's final question, because we have less than a minute left. We might run a few minutes over. We'll try and keep it as short as we can, I promise. Richard.

I'll be very quick. So, I'm talking about the full panoply of rugby. I'm not necessarily expecting Scarlets, if they are the people who win the licence, or, indeed, the Ospreys, to play in Parc y Scarlets. I'm talking about there are multiple iterations of professional rugby that we need to be better at having representative across the regions. And also the licence will contain terms about how we want that whole region to bring together semi-professional rugby, community rugby, into and up to a professional team. So, it's not just the professional team playing in multiple places; it could be examples of player development centres coming under those areas.

Thank you.

So, you're removing the name of 'the Scarlets' as well.

Okay. Right.

It was a question: you will remove the name of the Scarlets as well.

We're not saying that.

We've not had those discussions. It will be a west licence. We're assuming that the people who apply for those licences will put down what they want to have as a brand name attached to the different teams.

Okay. And then a final question from Mick.

You are not a pure corporate body, in the sense of some businesses; you are a membership-led organisation. You will have to take account of and what is considered and what is said at the EGM. On this possibility that there may be a different view to what you're proposing, have you given consideration to an alternative, a plan B?

I think Richard—

In terms of professional rugby, no, we don't have a plan B in relation to that, but we will make sure that we will have a—. I think the process of good governance is that we will prepare for the situation if we are, if I am, voted out at the EGM. Of course we'll prepare for that as a part of the process.

All right. Okay. Well, thank you very much. Can I thank you all for your evidence this morning?

A transcript of what was said will be sent to you so that you can check that it's a fair and accurate record. Thank you very much.

Thank you. We really are grateful for your time this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Diolch.

Diolch.

Thank you.

As our witnesses are leaving us—

Members, we will move immediately to papers to note. So, we will thank our witnesses once again for their evidence.