Civil War: What NZ Rugby's proposal two vote means for the game

By Liam Napier

New Zealand rugby’s provincial unions have convincingly voted through their polarising governance proposal to spark a civil war showdown with the game’s professional players.

At a Special General Meeting in Wellington today, New Zealand’s 26 provincial unions voted – via secret ballot – on two proposals for boardroom reform after the Pilkington review clearly stated rugby’s governance was not fit-for-purpose.

Eight months on from that damning report, following protracted negotiations, lobbying, threats and posturing, the provinces comfortably garnered enough support to meet the required two-thirds (67 per cent or 61 votes) majority of the 90 votes to usher through proposal two, which ensures three NZ Rugby board members must first serve on a provincial board.

Billed as the most significant decision since the game turned professional 28 years ago, the provinces enforced their constitutional control by a landslide result.

Proposal two passed by 69 votes to 21 while the NZ Rugby, NZ Rugby Players’ Association and Super franchise-backed proposal one that aligned with the Pilkington report for nine fully independently appointed board members was rejected by 31 votes to 59.

As signposted on Tuesday the provincial union way forward instigates far-reaching consequences, with the entire NZ Rugby board required to reapply for their respective roles.

NZ Rugby chairwoman Dame Patsy Reddy had previously stated, should Proposal 2 prevail, she would resign from her post as she does not support any compromise to a fully independent board.

With the Pilkington report and Proposal 1 recommendations rejected, attention turns to NZRPA chief executive Rob Nichol after he threatened to form a breakaway organisation to run the game’s professional players.

Nichol firmly believes the union’s proposal is a land grab - and a move to control future board appointments. The provinces have also positioned themselves in direct opposition to four former All Blacks captains, including Richie McCaw, Sean Fitzpatrick and Ian Kirkpatrick who publicly supported the push for independence.

“The expert panel laid out what we needed to do perfectly in their recommendations. Those recommendations got support from NZR, NZRC, Māori Rugby Board, Super clubs, NZRPA and a good group of PUs,” Nichol said following the vote. “It was a great opportunity for the game to make the changes required. It’s incredibly unfortunate we haven’t taken that opportunity and ended up with what the experts labelled status quo or worse.”

In a late turn, the Herald understands Auckland flipped its first vote at the 11th hour after pressure from its life members, which include Sir Graham Henry, Sir Bryan Williams, Grant Fox and Gary Whetton, to support proposal one.

The NZRPA had previously outed Auckland, Wellington, Canterbury, Hawke’s Bay, Bay of Plenty and North Harbour as the heavyweight unions backing proposal two, but the threat to form a breakaway organisation clearly galvanised strong support from the majority of other provinces.

While Auckland’s original backflip wasn’t anywhere close to enough for the NZ Rugby, NZRPA and Super franchise-backed proposal to edge over the line, other provinces, including Taranaki, Waikato, Otago and Manawatu voted in favour of proposal one to underline the split views throughout the country.

This article was first published on nzherald.co.nz and is republished here with permission