Author’s note: Ron Smale is the president of the Ontario Soccer Association – a man who fervently believes he and all provincial and territorial soccer association presidents should immediately be removed from the board of directors of the Canadian Soccer Association.
This being Canadian soccer, of course, that now makes him the only provincial or territorial soccer association president currently opposing the amended, watered-down version of reform now being considered.
And he’s not about to change his mind.
(And how’s this for on the record? The OSA filmed our entire interview, and put it on their website.)
Here, then, is one frank and informative discussion about the future of Canadian soccer:
[PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
---
Last year, the CSA Constitution Committee shocked everybody by coming up with a very sweeping reform package that, among other things, removes provincial presidents from the CSA board of directors, and cranks up the qualifications for those that remain. Ontario, I believe, supported this?
Correct, Ben. Yes.
Since then, recently, we found out (and it took some digging to find out) that the formula has been tinkered with, so that there are now seats for three provincial presidents. Alberta and Quebec, who opposed this before, are now in favour of it – and Ontario is against it.
That’s correct. We’re maintaining the position that was originally presented back in the May AGM of 2010, that no provincial presidents should be sitting on the board of directors of the CSA, and that it’s time to make this reform, and move forward to move the game of soccer in Canada in a very strong direction – whereby, in our perspective, the best people in soccer will be governing the game at the national level.
Don’t you feel – as much as I completely agree with that sentiment – that might weaken Ontario’s position in the overall structure of Canadian soccer and the way it’s governed, by not having yourself (or whoever has your job) on the board?
I don’t believe it will weaken our position at all. I don’t think it weakens the nation at all. If anything, it strengthens the nation. From my perspective, there is a component of the new structure – which we motioned for and was approved in May – called the Membership Forum. And in that forum, there is representation from all the provinces. They will meet twice a year with the new CSA board – with six elected and six appointed members and the president – and any domestic issues that happen to be within the provinces will obviously be conveyed up. I mean, at the end of the day, if you’re not happy with the people who are operating an association, there’s a democratic process to go through to change people, change the rule, change the structure. We’re very confident that the structure that was proposed is the best for the game of soccer.
The other argument that is made is because the Canadian Soccer Association is funded almost entirely by player-registration fees, the provincial presidents should be on the board to have a say in how those fees are spent.
Again, I don’t agree. From my perspective, we as a provincial body need to be doing our best to support our national athletes. I’m talking about athletes who are dedicating four and five days a week to showcase our country across the international market, across the international venue. As such, I firmly believe, and I have full confidence that the thirteen persons that are elected to this board would do a very, very good job. And I know, as a president of the Ontario Soccer Association and anyone who follows after me will have a voice. You go into these things with trust. You go into these things with confidence. And I have no concerns whatsoever, and my board and membership supports me in this role.
Now, as the horribly convoluted situation in Alberta evolves, and the links between it and the Canadian Soccer Association become plain, the urgency for reform becomes that much clearer. But the argument that I do sometimes hear is that – even in this compromised form – still going from twelve provincial presidents to three … wouldn’t that be an acceptable compromise?
Not from my perspective. We believe there needs to be a complete separation of the provincial component from the national component. I would be concerned that maybe the three individuals involved – the three provincial bodies, whichever those bodies are – may get stuck in the process of what I’ll call good governance, good decision making. The other comment I’ll make is that the current model is a policy board model – which is very, very important to us – where operations is managed by staff, and policy, strategic planning and finance is managed by the board. I would want to see this clarity maintained. And I’ll also say that as a provincial president, in the short term that I have been connected with the board of the CSA and the OSA, as a servant to the game of soccer, I can only serve one master. I cannot serve two. And when I sit at the CSA board level, I need to be looking at the game from a national perspective. Some presidents will tell you they can do both. I don’t believe that’s possible. There needs to be a separation, but at the same time, there needs to be good links of communication between the provincial associations and the national body.
Now I know that we Canadians, we’re very polite and we don’t like to discuss each other’s business, and what happens over there is not what happens over here. But the situation in Alberta, which, briefly: You have a pro-reform president in Chris Billings who is suddenly – and very conveniently from the anti-reform point of view – removed from office by his first vice-president, Mario Charpentier, with – minimum! – help from Mike Traficante, the director-at-large at the CSA, and I’m told other CSA people are involved but I haven’t had them all identified yet … Can you tell me, from your perspective and your belief in the game and your experience – what the heck is going on in Alberta, as far as you can tell?
Well, Alberta obviously is going through some difficult times. I am not here, nor am I prepared, to speak to that issue. I would respect that if I was in a situation here in the province of Ontario, and we were going through some type of issue with respect to how we’re governed or how we’re structured, that people would have the courtesy and respect to allow us to deal with that. My position is I am going to not comment on the situation in Alberta. Alberta will work its issues out with its membership. It will work its issues out with those who feel they can lead the association forward. And, again, I go back to the comment that we in Ontario will stay in the position that we are with respect to reform, and move forward that way.
We’re left in the intriguing situation that, because of the knock-on effects of the Alberta mess, you as a pro-reform president in Ontario are now – near as I can tell – the only provincial president who is currently against the reform package as it stands at the moment. THAT must concern you.
It does concern me, and my comment to that situation is that I believe we [the full CSA board] will be meeting February 4, 5 and 6. There will be a board meeting on the Friday evening, and we’ll be into the Special General Meeting on Saturday. And there is more opportunity for us, as presidents, to discuss this whole issue of a compromise model that was presented back in the month of October. I’m hopeful that people will really look at what we proposed and what was approved. I’ve heard the comments that there’s been external pressure put on some groups or associations and/or presidents, and I’m hoping that all the presidents from across the country will start thinking of the athletes. That’s where our focus should be. It should always be on the athletes, and making the best decisions for the athletes. And I’m not saying that presidents like myself are not good people. We are. But you need the separation, whereby there are no conflicts of interest; there are no issues that I need to be concerned about when I’m making a vote or I’m approving something or I’m disapproving something at the national level, because I fear it’s going to have a negative impact on my provincial association. I need to be able to work at that level, and be able to make those decisions knowing I’m doing this for every single athlete, from the east coast to the west coast to the north.
And I absolutely agree that is where the focus ought to be. But if you and the other presidents find yourself talking about a situation where at least one – and maybe more – high-ranking directors of the CSA have directly intervened in a provincial organization, deposed a president, and recalibrated an entire board’s political standing to try to oppose a reform you support? Again, absolutely! I’m with the players! But this is in the way.
I understand. And as I said, I’m confident that people will reflect. I’m confident people will come to the table knowing the decision they make is critical to the growth of the game of soccer in Canada. And, personally, I can’t do anything with respect to changing a person’s mind, other than saying “Look, these are the pros and these are the cons that I see in the two models. In the compromise model – I’ll use that term – which was the one that was proposed moving forward, again you still have that provincial presidential impact. And that needs to be removed. As such, we’re going to hold firm. I’ll be in discussions with my peer group at the CSA level, and we’ll see where it all falls out at the end of the day. If people at the end of the day decide they’re going to support the [compromise] reform, then they’ll support the reform. And at the end of the day, as a provincial body and a provincial association, we’ll have to respect that. That’s the bottom line. We’re going to respect. We’re not here to submarine; we’re not here to throw up a huge barrier. We’re here to provide our input, and provide our best knowledge and our best issues going forward. To the provincial presidents across the country, I want to say: Look at Canada’s golf association. Look at our Rugby association. Look at the skating association. All those groups have moved in the last two to three years with changing their governance structure. And those structures do not include representation from individual provinces. Their governance structure is people who are dedicated to the national vision, the national strategy moving forward. We’re communicating with our groups; I’m communicating with presidents across the country. We’re still having what I would call honest, candid discussions. I’m looking forward to this February meeting because, as I’ve said – and I think they understand and they believe – this is a watershed moment for the game of soccer. Soccer, we’ve had our struggles, and I’ve heard lots of finger-pointing and I’ve seen lots of people making jabs at individuals personally who are in associations and/or the CSA or whatever the case may be, and I would like us to really get together as a group, and say to ourselves “This is the best way to go.” And I’m confident that we’ll get there.
How important is governance reform at the CSA level to our men’s national soccer team ever qualifying for the FIFA World Cup?
I think it’s critical. Under the new model that we motioned for and was approved at the May AGM of 2010, that model is basically twelve of the finest people in Canada, who can take the game and move it forward – with no strings attached: west-coast issues, east-coast issues, central Canadian issues. And I think it’s critical to our development, what we’re going to need in the next eight-to-ten years, to put into place, put into gear all those resources that we require. We’re going to need all those resources and dollars that are required to finance and promote national-team play. So from my perspective – it’s critical! And you may ask me the question “Well, what do you think will happen if, in fact, it doesn’t go through?” Well, I’ll be there to do what I can as a representative of the province of Ontario, but more as a national rep to say “Okay, what are we doing moving forward?”
Ron, thanks very much. That’s great.
All right. Thank you.
(Onward!)