Dear Editor,
I hesitantly decided to pen this letter so please let me make it clear that I am speaking on my personal behalf and not for the WICB. They are quite capable of dealing with Mr Nandlall.
On Thursday January 29, 2015 an article was carried in the Guyana Chronicle captioned ‘The will of parliament cannot be frustrated and defeated by the whims and fancies of the WICB -AG.’
The article also quotes the AG as saying, “It is important to note that the WICB was consulted while the bill was in the National Assembly, at the Select Committee, and they agreed in writing that they will play a role in the appointment of the Ombudsman. In those circumstances they were included in the bill, in the manner outlined in section 17.” This is incorrect as the WICB never agreed to play any part or role in the appointment of the Ombudsman. In fact, on the two occasions that the WICB communicated with the Minister of Sport and the Clerk of the National Assembly, they completely and categorically refused to accept the bill in its current form.
(Copies of letter to Dr Frank Anthony from Dr Julian Hunte dated December 4, 2012, and letter to Mr Sherlock Isaacs, Clerk of the National Assembly, from Mr Dave Cameron dated October 24, 2013, provided.)
These were the only items of correspondence sent by the WICB to the authorities in Guyana with reference to the Cricket Administration Bill before its passage in the National Assembly. I challenge the Attorney General to produce the correspondence he is referring to and to make same public.
It is clear the Attorney General and his Minister of Sport have belatedly realised that another of their plethora of mistakes in the drafting of the Cricket Administration Bill has been exposed. The minutes of the 10th Meeting of the Select Committee of the Parliament dated March 11, 2013 on page 5 state the following:
“Members suggested that before the Regulations were drafted to include the WICB to act as the facilitator to initiate the first elections of the Guyana Cricket Board, the committee should first inform the Board (WICB) to ensure that they are in agreement to participate in the process. The Chairman (Dr. Frank Anthony) then suggested that within the next two weeks the committee would communicate with the WICB on its decision of making the WICB the facilitator in the holding of the first election of the GCB. Thereafter the committee requested that the Chief Parliamentary Counsel re-draft Clause 6 to include that the WICB and/or such other authority in the absence of the WICB act as the facilitator in conducting the first election process of the GCB.”
There is no record existing to show that the Minister, Dr Frank Anthony, wrote the WICB to convey the decision of the Parliamentary Select Committee; instead the Minister inserted himself into the process and added the WICB as a party to be “consulted”, without their consent. Members of the Select Committee should revisit these minutes and ask questions.
We have had two attempts at resolution of this matter: the Caricom brokered agreement in 2012 and the WICB/GCB/GOG Memorandum of Agreement in 2014, both of which have been thrown aside by these two ministers and we do not expect any resolution once they are involved in the process. In fact, the Attorney General was the Counsel for some of the principals in the disputes and cannot be considered neutral in any of these discussions.
Anyone reading the government’s Cricket Administration Bill would realise the GCB has to pay the Ombudsman among other expenditure stipulated in the bill. The sole source of income for the GCB is the WICB Development Fund and revenue from WICB matches fixed for Guyana, yet the GCB is required by this flawed Act to account for these funds to the Guyana Parliament instead of the WICB. It would be interesting to see if the WICB continues the funding if it is not used for specific purposes. Since the Attorney General and his government did not allocate any state funding to the GCB, even though they have to send their accounts to parliament, it would be more interesting to see what would be the situation when the WICB stops the funding. The WICB’s “whims and fancies” may then be considered.
Yours faithfully,
Anand Sanasie
Secretary
Guyana Cricket Board
