Some members of the the IMO have called for a promised 'lookback' review of the organisation's finances and governance to take place without any further delay.

The fall-out from the controversy over the substantial remuneration and retirement package of former IMO Chief Executive George McNeice and other financial and governance issues in the organisation dating back a number of years is set to continue in a debate on motions tabled for the IMO's AGM in Maynooth, Co. Kildare this weekend.

The doctors' union in March of last year decided, at an Extraordinary General Meeting, to undertake a retrospective review of the internal finances and governance of the IMO, including Mr Mc Neice's contractual and pay arrangements, going back to 1993.

The review would also have included looking at issues including the operation of IMO subsidiary companies, the awarding of contracts and consultancies, and expenses payments.

The IMO leadership subsequently decided to defer the appointment of consultants to undertake this review due, it said, to the 'serious financial and legal implications of such an exercise'.

However, a motion on this issue, from the Sligo-Leitrim GP branch, proposes that, 'to prevent erosion of the IMO membership, and 'to restore and maintain the confidence and trust of the membership', the retrospective review, as agreed at the EGM, should proceed without further delay.

Another motion, from the Organisation's North East GP branch, has demanded that 'the IMO delivers on the EGM motion for a formal review relating to the pension arrangements of the former Chief Executive'.

The IMO's Council, in a separate motion before the AGM, proposes that the matter of appointing a firm and proceeding with the retrospective review be decided through a ballot of the IMO membership whereby members would be given a summary of the issues involved and asked to vote either for or against appointing a firm to conduct the review.

A further motion on the agenda states that last year's EGM, convened by IMO Council, followed the refusal of the IMO to hold an EGM which should have been convened on foot of the collection of 120 members' signatures as per the IMO rules.

It was claimed by some GPs at the time that the IMO leadership had effectively 'hijacked' the EGM.

The motion, signed by Drs Cathal O'Sullivan and Garrett McGovern, says the IMO leadership has failed to take action over the last year on the motions passed at the EGM in respect of a retrospective review, and therefore, a committee of IMO members should be appointed by the IMO council to oversee the implementation of the promised review.

The IMO leadership, in another AGM motion, has also proposed rule and code of practice changes to improve the governance and structures of the IMO.

This follows a separate governance review of the union.

The changes include adopting a new constitution and set of rules for the IMO.

The IMO's finances and governance have been the subject of controversy and tension within the Organisation since it was reported in late 2012 that Mr McNeice was to receive a total retirement package of almost €10 million.

The retrospective review of how the IMO was run over the past two decades, should it go ahead, would include the period when the current Health Minister James Reilly was a senior figure in the Organisation.

Other motions to be debated at the IMO AGM include criticism of the proposed under sixes free GP care proposals and a call for proper negotiations on the issue to take place.