Author’s note: Chris Billings was president of the Alberta Soccer Association until he was ousted in a boardroom uprising last spring.
He wrote to me last night, answering all the questions I asked in my open letter of December 13, 2010.
>>> Answers to two further questions -- submitted by a reader involving specific aspects of the charges against Billings -- will be published in a separate Canadian Soccer News story tomorrow morning.
Presented as received, and without comment:
[PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
---
1) Your brief term as ASA president has certainly stirred up a lot of accusations and controversy. Is there anything you feel you could or should have done better?
Not sure that I would categorize the term as ‘brief’, as I was elected in January of 2009 and there were many positive changes in 2009 for the Association. In terms of the situation that ASA found itself in 2010, there is one item that certainly should have been considered further, and that is the involvement of the CSA Executive Committee. From the outset, the CSA stated that they would not become involved. They were well aware that the Membership had called for the removal of Mario Charpentier, Fred Kern, Colin Innes & company. The CSA was well aware of the April 24th meeting, and had been offered the opportunity to attend, if they so choose. The CSA instead repeated numerous times to both the Charpentier group, and the Membership of Alberta Soccer, that they would allow the matter to be sorted out internally; within the Province. Without external involvement. And the ASA Membership went forward, under the ASA Bylaws, to affect the changes that were put forth in the petition.
However, the day after the decision on April 24th was reached by the Membership to remove Mr. Charpentier and company, the CSA Executive Committee reversed their previous stance, at [CSA director-at-large] Mike Traficante’s forceful persistence. If their involvement had been anticipated beforehand, then the Membership could have had the opportunity to address the matter with CSA. After April 24th they (and the new Board) got no opportunity to present their perspective to CSA prior to the CSA taking sides in the matter. If CSA had stood by their previous stance, the decisions reached on April 24th would have stood, and the Association would have moved forth from that point, at the will of the majority of the Membership.
2) Was your support for the proposed CSA governance reforms a factor in your removal?
Without question. The factor that does get overlooked at times is the elections to the CSA Board of Directors, in particular that of Mr. Traficante, whose term expires in May.
3) As far as you know, did anyone from the CSA apply pressure to have you removed?
Yes. After the decision of the Membership on April 24th, Mr. Traficante applied considerable pressure to the CSA Executive Committee, and continues to do so today.
4) Should provincial association heads have any role on the CSA board, helping Canada qualify for the FIFA World Cup?
A difficult, but very good question Ben. I know firsthand how much work has been put into the CSA Constitution by the CSA Bylaws Committee, and I certainly would not want to give an indication that I’m not supportive of their efforts. The individuals composing that committee have a great deal of knowledge as to how the Bylaws of a National sports organization should be structured.
Being said, the qualification for a World Cup doesn’t come, strictly speaking from a financial perspective, without the support by the Provinces. As Gerry Dobson recently remarked on his year-end show, the number of fixtures that Canadian National teams play will be directly proportional to their overall performance on the CONCACAF and world stage. These international matches come at a cost of course. And as with any organization, those who contribute financially have an expectation, rightfully so, as to how the organization should be run. Finding the right balance in a Constitution between how the Provinces have their views heard and how a Board of Directors functions from that point is the key.
In short however, the appointment of specific individuals to the CSA Board of Directors by virtue of their status within a Member Province doesn’t allow for their impartiality on the CSA Board. Even if the individual has the best interests, it doesn’t put aside the reality that the Provincial Membership has an expectation that their Provincial Association’s welfare is being looked after on the CSA Board of Directors. This simply cannot be overlooked.
As far as a compromise whereby 3 Provincial Associations get representatives on a CSA Board of Directors, in order to allow the CSA Bylaws to pass, I think it would be a step in the wrong direction. Not only does it not solve the problem, it further compounds it democratically by quashing the opinions of 11 other Provincial & Territorial Members.
5) It has been suggested that everyone involved in the ASA dispute should step aside, and an entirely new board be selected. Your thoughts on this, please?
Ben, I think you would agree that the members need to be able to select an entirely new board. If everyone needs to step aside to do this, then they should. I am not going to say who should and should not run although I certainly have my own views about who is and who is not going to be able to keep the association together and do good by it.
6) How well, in your opinion, is the ASA serving Alberta soccer at present?
Clearly not too well at the moment...
---
Canadian Soccer News invites both Mike Traficante and Mario Charpentier to respond. All responses will be considered on the record.
Tomorrow, Billings offers a detailed refutation of the charges against him, and explains why he chose to go to court instead of relying on ASA and CSA appeals mechanisms.
Onward!
Related:
An open letter to Mario Charpentier
An open letter to Chris Billings