Dear Editor,
The GFF’s Normalization Committee Chairman Clinton Urling has disclosed that no General Council meeting is likely to be held until September, despite the fact that all the emphasis is being placed upon constitutional reform. The General Council is the highest decision-making forum according to the constitution, and the convening of quarterly General Council meetings is a requirement, unless there has been an amendment, which no longer requires four General Council meetings, per year.
Are the affiliates of the GFF comfortable with this development? Suffice it to say that the convening of their respective Annual General Meetings; the submission of the annual calendar of activities; and the nation’s participation in the Olympics and World Cup qualifiers are all front-burner issues that need to be discussed within the General Council forum at a meeting, in addition to the appointments of the Technical Director and senior male National Team Head Coach.
To deprive the membership of a voice, or to fail to listen to their plight is undemocratic and non-transparent. Would it be prudent for the Technical Director on any given day to just appear at a match, in any association without prior notification? Is it prudent for affiliates not to be knowledgeable about income and expenditure for 2015, or the state of the debt and its liquidation?
In the final analysis the strengthening of clubs and associations, inclusive of constitutional upgrades, are also important factors within the context of modernizing the sport’s administration. By the way, was not constitutional reform done before under Klass’ presidency? Was it ever ratified for enactment?
Yours faithfully,
Lester Sealey
