CHIEF EXECUTIVE of the Health Service Executive (HSE) Prof Brendan Drumm said the board of the organisation was seeking to interfere in the selection process for new directors in a stand-off over the filling of these posts that developed earlier this year.
Official documents suggest that the HSE board sought to have an input into the process. However, Prof Drumm effectively argued that there was no provision for a process that was already under way – and which was being organised through the Public Appointments Service – to be adjusted.
The documents show that the board, which completely rejected the assertion of interference, withdrew Prof Drumm’s delegated authority to make the appointments and said that these would have to be subject to its approval.
The board ultimately decided not to fill the three positions. Earlier this month, new top-level organisational structures were introduced. Under these changes, there are now four directors carrying out the roles originally due to be streamlined into three posts.
The Irish Times revealed last March that there was serious divisions between Prof Drumm and the board over who had the final say in the appointment of three national directors. Documentation released under the Freedom of Information Act reveals the extent of the tensions over the filling of the posts of national director of operations, national director of planning and performance, and national director of quality and clinical care.
The documents show that on March 2nd Prof Drumm wrote to HSE chairman Liam Downey saying that it was not possible to adjust the process and/or the governance procedure in relation to the selection and appointment of the national directors.
“I believe it would be inappropriate for me to alter it in any way. To do so would harm the organisation’s reputation and undermine the trust future applicants for senior posts would have in our recruitment processes. Interfering with the process would raise questions as to my integrity. It would compromise the current process,” he said.
On March 4th, Mr Downey replied that the board of the HSE had adopted a policy with immediate effect that the appointment of the national directors was subject to its approval.
In another letter that day, Mr Downey said that the fact that the board had delegated some of its duties to the chief executive did not “diminish the authority and responsibility of the board for maintaining engagement and oversight in the conduct of the affairs of the HSE . . . In this particular instance – the recruitment of three national directors to new posts – the board has a legitimate interest in ensuring that their views, notably in relation to the long-term strategic requirements /considerations for all three appointments and succession planning, are taken into account in filling these positions.”
Mr Downey wrote that it was completely unacceptable “to suggest that the board’s accountability and governance in this matter would harm the organisation’s reputation – in fact, the contrary is the case. It is also entirely inappropriate to suggest that this represents interference in the process.”
Prof Drumm wrote back saying that it had been indicated that his approach was being portrayed as him not co-operating with the board. “I believe that my position has been inaccurately represented,” he said.
On March 11th, Mr Downey said that the interest of the board’s Remuneration and Organisation Committee in the filling of the posts was to ensure that the board’s views, notably in relation to long-term strategic requirements/considerations for all three appointments and succession planning were taken fully into account. “This is particularly relevant as these appointments are for a five-year period and your tenure as CEO expires next year,” he told Prof Drumm.
Mr Downey also said that, in relation to the suggestion by the chief executive that his position had been misrepresented, “the making of unsubstantiated allegations in this way is inappropriate and disappointing”.