By Eddie Norfolk (May 24, 2019)
So at least one person thinks the governance of Cricket Canada deserves a rating of “A”, based on survey results reviewed and summarized by David Liverman of Canada Cricket Online.
I certainly would not rate last year’s Saturday afternoon public sessions of the Cricket Canada Annual General Meeting as being close to an “A”, but perhaps my ideas stem from a different background and experience.
The first Saturday open session began with some comments from the Chair about the next item being a nomination for an individual honorary membership but that such membership had been dropped from the constitution. So there was a bit of a pause around the theme: “what shall we do?”
I sat thinking that this decision should have been made before this stage. Either stick to the policy of no longer having life-time achievement honorary members or have a written proposal to change the constitution to allow honorary members. If the constitutional change succeeds by whatever margin is required then the nomination could be put to the vote. If the change fails, then the nomination drops off the table.
The Provincial Reports
All the provinces had submitted reports by the required deadline and it was possible to print and review the reports. The oral comment process by each province during the meeting had not really been established in advance to fit the scheduled time on the agenda. But those attending did hear about some funds having been received by certain provinces to help support infrastructure.
It may have been a better idea to have included some items on Sunday’s agenda before elections to the Board were held, but elections took place on the Saturday afternoon. This timing does mean that if someone is voted off the board then they may not be around to address matters on the Sunday agenda where they may have had responsibility or responsibilities during the previous year or two.
But, one way or another, the river of life goes on with a surging tide, almost no water or with a smooth flow.
Now there was an interesting reaction from one re-elected person who talked for a while about the burdens and responsibilities. The thought that came to my mind: “So why did you stand for re-election? Why not get out if it’s such a burden?”
I may not have been alone in my thoughts.
Perhaps some who voted for this successful candidate were in some major or minor shock. But nobody said or shouted out words such as “Resign!” or “Get out then – cast aside this burden on your life.”
When the Saturday open session when the election results were declared had ended, I talked with a couple of other visitors to the AGM about the fact that the Sunday agenda still did not seem to indicate which sessions were open and which closed to ordinary people. But we agreed the agenda did not look too enthralling, so give it a miss and do something else on Sunday.
The list of candidates for various positions on the Cricket Canada Board has now emerged. It is
interesting that at least one of the candidates would be struck off the list of candidates if the currently posted Constitution of the Toronto and District Cricket Association is still active. The currently published constitution on the league’s website was approved and amended in February 2009.
I have included a section from that constitution as Appendix A.
Now one existing Cricket Canada Board Member would seem to have been elected to the national board contrary to Article 5.a of the T&DCA’s February 21, 2009 constitution. But the current wording of Article 5.b seems to provide some basis for a person with a major post on the T&DCA board to serve on another cricketing organization’s board thanks to the current wording in section 5.b.
Now, in fairness, I did not find a constitution of the type published on the T&DCA website on the one other Ontario league that I checked this evening.
In some provinces where there are a limited number of clubs registered with a league or leagues then some people may have to be on more than one board. But where there are larger leagues then there ought to be enough people to have some different folks on different levels of governing body.
So a few thoughts before Appendix A with the excerpt from the T&DCA’s constitution as amended in 2009. I wonder if the published version is “the current version”. But if it is out of date, then whose head should be on the block in the world of the T&DCA, and, possibly, on some higher cricket organization in the local through provincial through national Canadian regulatory pyramid ?
So no grounds for Grade A. And that is before any consideration of late notices or notices about various national team games and some tournaments that may be trials for a national team rather than an alleged national championship.
Similarly, I have not addressed concerns about the failure to acquire equipment and a person or two who would video record various of these games and trials to assist player development or to make such games visible to the broader cricketing community. It might encourage “the sponsors” if their ads around the ground gained more exposure.
Filtering some of these ideas down from the national to the lower levels would be useful, unless such ideas begin to improve from a bottom-up rather than top-down basis. Or might things improve, sooner or later, via the learning path from out-sourced events such as the Global T20?
So I do not concur with whoever thinks it’s “GIVE US AN “A” for Governance at the Cricket Canada level.
APPENDIX A: Excerpt from the published version of the “Toronto and District Cricket Association Constitution” as amended on 21 February 2009.
“ARTICLE 5 – TERM LIMITS AND RESTRICTIONS ON BOARD OF GOVERNORS
a. The President, Vice President, Correspondence Secretary and the Treasurer of T&DCA are not allowed to hold positions concurrently in any other Cricket Leagues, Ontario or other provincial Cricketing organizations, and Cricket Canada or other federal Cricketing organizations including Maple Leaf Cricket Club (MLCC).
b. All Board of Governors of T&DCA are prohibited from accepting any positions with any Cricket Leagues or Associations not affiliated to T&DCA. They also must seek prior approval from the Board of Governors before accepting any other voluntary positions with other cricketing organizations.
c. No person shall serve the office of the Presidency for more than two (2) consecutive terms.”
A.1 Bold text indicates emphasis added.
A.2 Article 5.b could be re-written to indicate T&DCA Board of Governors outside the four position holders stated in 5.a may be allowed to serve on other cricket organization boards with approval from the T&DCA Board of Governors.