Can History repeat itself at the GFF AGM?

Apr 25, 2014 Sports

---

Many of the supporters and well-wishers of the GFF, President, Christopher Matthias may not have been involved in the administration of football for a period of 15 years, or close to it. Or, some who may have heard of the incident turned a blind eye. Editor, the incident I am referring to is a “Vote of no Confidence” Matthias had received in 2001, as the then President, GFA, for financial impropriety!
Wherein the GFA under his stewardship could not have accounted for $500,000 from sponsorship monies compliments of Banks DIH, for a Premier and Division 1 League competitions respectively.
With the significant amount of sponsorship exceeding $1,000,000 that at the time was the largest amount in the city’s history. It could have been considered an act of deceitfulness for the individual to attempt “sweeping the dust under the carpet”, while hastily pursuing the commencement of the season, the following year.
However, with that approach being unsuccessful, six (6) senior clubs within the GFA, requested an “Emergency General Council Meeting with a Vote of no Confidence” being the primary reason. Editor, of course this was done in accordance to the constitutional requirement, of which the GFF was duly informed.
It must be noted at the time that I was the Secretary of Fruta Conquerors and it was a principled position taken by the Club’s executive, to serve as a deterrent to others. What was also taken into consideration was as the President, with a compulsory signature for withdrawals, his overlooking of the finances was lax, to the extent that on a monthly basis a financial statement had to be submitted to the GFF, along with minutes of monthly executive meetings.
So, due to the lack of meaningful perusal, there was no confidence in Matthias continuing to lead the GFA!
So factually why it is the commendable gesture of East Demerara and East Bank Football Associations collectively is not lauded towards submitting the motion for the “Vote of no Confidence” against Mr. Matthias, who was elected to serve for two years!
Does the completion of one year make a difference? Since previously it was reported in one of the dailies that “Matthias should serve out his term and clean up the mess he inherited”.
But what is significantly being overlooked is the inability of Matthias to manage the financial affairs of the GFF, in an accountable and transparent manner and definitely not as his own. Meanwhile, has it dawned within the minds of supporters and well-wishers that a stipend is not a salary, and it’s an abuse of power for the President to approve money unilaterally for transportation, meals and possible accommodation for a Committee Member, when the very stipend normally takes care of those expenses?
Moreover, with an increase of almost 300% and despite the fact that the General Secretary had refused to endorse his signature, and the then accountant, outlining the fundamental flaw. Interestingly, what of the President’s Personal Assistant, with unconstitutional powers, in financial transactions on behalf of the GFF?
My, oh my! Surely if the notion of accountability and transparency that was highlighted in Matthias’ manifesto is being overlooked. Then, why should he continue as President, bearing in mind that distortions, half-truths, lies and plagiarism form a crucial script in his retention of power?
While I’m no longer integrally involved in the daily administration of the sport, at club or association level, on the national level, however I still feel that my letters provides useful guidance, for those with a vested interest towards visualizing meaningful development for the sport, and public edification.
Definitely not, the sport must return to the days of nepotism, which would be “ten” (10) times worse than what were the ideas for sweeping changes, in last year’s AGM! Sadly, with this not being achieved, then the “Vote of no confidence” must be successful by way of a 2/3 majority, in accordance to parliamentary procedure.
In so doing the best option remains the appointment of a President (ag), and definitely not “Elections of Office Bearers”, since the UDFA issue has to be reviewed, along with the suspension of Vice President, Collie Hercules and compatriot Ivan Persaud’s withdrawal from executive meetings.
As I have said before, if one iota of skullduggery is established that there was financial impropriety by the previous executive, then there must be sanctions. This also must be applied to the present executive and to those in pursuit of holding office.
The monies are not yours to be spent lavishly, but rather to deal with the relevant checks and balances! Editor, when the important factor of continued under-development is taken into consideration, then how it is an under-17 GFF Inter-Association tournament can commence, without all the participants completing their respective domestic competition?
How much more evidence can one ask for in pursuit of making the sport marketable once more?
History, once again must repeat itself. “Hit the road Chris, don’t you come back no more”!

Respectfully yours,
Lester Sealey

---

---