BCF MANAGEMENT BOARD MEETING
Saturday 30th August 2003 at Somerset House in London
Your Webmaster was stand-in SCCU rep for this meeting. It's years since he attended a meeting of the Management Board, and he was curious to see how it comports itself these days. He is pleased to confirm that there was no sign of acrimony, despite inevitable differences of opinion. If this sounds like a Cabinet whitewash, it wasn't meant to.
Gerry Walsh took the Chair, in the absence of Roy Heppinstall. 19 attended altogether, though not all had voting rights. We report matters largely as they happened, and not necessarily in Agenda, or any other particular, order. (1) Minutes. We are once again behind with the minutes. Those of the previous meeting got crowded out. We have since heard privately that there is another, earlier, set of MB minutes which also hasn't been ratified yet. The BCF's records of meetings have been an ongoing problem over the last 12 months and more, and the MB recognises that it's got to do something about it. (2) Distribution of Papers, and emails. Someone remarked that the papers of the meeting, sent by email, had caused his printer to burn out. It must have been more than 80 sides, if you printed the whole lot out, and that's not counting the bits that actually came by snail. Should we have a policy about how big it can be before the Office snails it? How about Council papers? As far as your Webmaster knows, Council papers go by snail and he wishes they didn't. One or two MB members commented ruefully on the number of MB emails they had received in the last 24 hours. We hate to say "goes with the job", but it probably does. (3) Disability issues. Much time was spent on this, and very much more had been spent by certain officers behind the scenes. Bruce Birchall, a principal agitator on the subject, attended by invitation. It is probably fair to say that even he, if not completely satisfied, went away with a conviction that the MB really is doing something. This paragraph is abbreviated. (4) Constitutional Changes. The MB agreed to propose, at the September meeting of Council, that the Finance Director be no longer ex officio a member of the Finance Committee. Proposals to disregard proxies for quorum purposes were on the agenda already. There will also be a proposal to make the BCF's Mission Statement even more politically correct than it is now. (5) Magazine of the Year. Ray Starkie of Cowley CC was formally presented with a framed document marking his club's award. (6) Mind Sports Council. Gerry Walsh, your President, announced that he had been elected Chairman of the Mind Sports Council a couple of weeks before. Neither did we, but it is a loose association of organisations covering things like Chess, Bridge, Draughts, Shogi, Othello, Backgammon, Scrabble, you name it. We would name it if we could, but we can't. It has a Constitution written on the back of an envelope. The main thing is that we are talking to these people. (7) Sponsorship and financial support. Things were said which we cannot reveal, but there can be no harm in saying the BCF is still hot on the trail of (8) Money. The audited Accounts 2002-3, which will be presented to Council in September, show a modest loss. It is more modest than the April forecast, mostly because the British Championship Congress turned out to be even more in the black than had been thought. It was remarked that we couldn't go on just hoping something would turn up, even if it sometimes did. (9) Annual meeting 2004. The MB will recommend that last year's one-off experiment, to hold the meeting in October rather than September, be repeated in 2004. The idea is to ease the pressure of time in preparing things like accounts. In 2002 we got into time trouble anyway, which is no doubt the main reason it's September again this year. But it is still felt that October would be a better choice. (10) International Director. There is a new candidate for this job: Rupert Jones (whom we don't know), nominated by Yorkshire and Warwickshire. This does not mean a contested election, because the incumbent has decided not to stand. All of the others are doing so. (11) Honorary Life Vice-President. At the September Council meeting, the MB will propose the election of Stewart Reuben. (12) Achievement Report against the 2002-3 Business Plan. This goes to Council in September, and the MB reviewed it. It is a detailed document setting out the various aims and objectives and their outcomes. (13) Corporate Plan. The MB also considered the draft Corporate Plan for the three years from May 2004. This goes to Council for approval in September, and shortly thereafter - all being well - to the DCMS. (14) Was your Meeting really Necessary? Of course it was. It did essential things. As it happens, it threw up an important fact, only just discovered, which hardly anyone knew about and which needed urgent attention. But the meeting rambled, sometimes confusingly, and spent too much time on minor points and digressions to the detriment - and in some cases the exclusion - of major items. Perhaps some of the detail might have been better dealt with outside the meeting by those specially concerned.
rjh 1.9.03
BCF MANAGEMENT BOARD MEETING
28 June 2003
The Management Board met on Saturday 28th June in Nottingham with Gerry Walsh in the Chair. Attendance totalled 20 although not all were there all the time. There was another BCF event taking place in the same building which involved some actual chess. The following is a summary of the main items of interest, and cannot include all matters discussed in a long and complex Agenda. (1) Appointments. After some detailed discussion on Directors’ responsibilities, Roy Heppinstall was appointed to the vacant position of Chief Executive and Robert Richmond, a qualified accountant from Slough, to the vacant position of Finance Director. A new post of Director of Membership Structures and Information and Communications Technology [incredulous italics mine: rjh] was filled by Bruce Holland, and Neville Belinfante of Bucks was appointed as Strategic Planning Officer. (2) Committees. In a review of the Committee structure it was understood that the Disability Committee would be re-convened under the Chairmanship of Home Director Cyril Johnson who, in the absence of a report from the BCF's technical advisers, was instructed to ascertain the facts relating to the responsibilities of the BCF under the Disability Discrimination Act. It was pointed out to him that this information was available on the Disability Rights Commission Website [address not supplied: rjh]. (3) BCF Affiliations. Wirral & District League; Gibraltar; Smith & Williamson Young Masters; Huddersfield Congress. (4) New Arbiters. Phil Thomas (now Glasgow), Simon Woodcock (Leigh Lancs), Carl Tillotson (Blackburn) and Ior Lewyk (Bradford). (5) Money. The Chairman of the Finance Committee advised that the accounts of the Federation would most likely show a modest deficit for the year 2002/2003. (6) Glorney & Faber Cups would revert to competition between just the four Home Countries as from 2004. (7) 2004 Counties Championship Finals. the venue will be Ratcliffe College, in Leicestershire, marginally more accessible by public transport than this year’s venue being "only" 1½ miles from the nearest railway station. (8) BCF's Name. A motion would be put to the next Council meeting seeking authority to explore the possibility of a name change to "English Chess Federation" or some similar variation. (9) Publicity. Attempts would be made to include more news of BCF events in ChessMoves and also to use this publication to sell the Federation more positively. (10) BCF Posts. It was noted that Directors' posts should be advertised on the BCF Website and in ChessMoves by 26th July 2003, and that all nominees declared by 23rd August would be able to include an election address for circulation with the Council papers. Election papers would also include the number of Board meetings attended by all
retiring Directors in the previous year. (11) Charity events. It was agreed that a Charity Chess event to be run by Bill Putnam in Central London on 9th August 2003 would be exempt from Game Fee. But a proposal that all Charity events should be so exempt was not agreed. All such applications should be judged on their merits.
David Smith
SCCU Representative
2nd July 2003
BCF COUNCIL MEETING
Saturday 26th April in London, at the Hotel Ibis Euston
Another BCF meeting where everyone behaved. This is getting to be too much of a good thing.
Well, they didn't quite. This was a Council meeting. But, while there was plenty of disagreement, you got the impression that by and large everyone was pulling in the same direction.
Attendance was low: 36 at its highest point, if we counted right. Main points, not necessarily in the right order: (1) Money. It was nearly all about money, of course. If your Webmaster has got anything wrong he hopes that those who understand money will correct him. John Philpott's new-style presentation of the Accounts is less hermetic to him that what we used to get, and this has helped. (Someone else made a similar remark at the meeting.) The Accounts, for the Federation's financial year about to end on the 30th April, will show a deficit of something like £2000. This is after income which - apart from the obvious - includes substantial things like sponsorship for the Grand Prix and British Championship, funds from the BCF Youth Chess Trust, and quite a lot from Joe Public in response to the Olympiad appeal. Your Webmaster has still to get his head round the writeback of provisions, and transfers from the Legacies Fund. But it seems to be accepted, and he is ready to believe, that the £2000 deficit is a fair reflection of where we're really at.
The DCMS grant has gone up to £60,000 and is our largest single source of income. Game Fee looks like bringing in some £49,000 (£8000 less than the figure optimistically budgeted for). Direct Members are on a plateau at 1100 or so, and bring in £27,000 before costs. Costs include the bi-monthly ChessMoves, after which there's only two or three quid left out of a Junior Member's £10 membership fee. They also include discounts on BCF products, and whatever the Full Members aren't paying in Game Fee at congresses. These last two items, doubtless unquantifiable, never appear in the Accounts but must impact on the £16,000 given as net DM income.
At all events it was agreed that we couldn't go on like this. Council then voted on (2) Game Fee (with effect from 1.9.03)
This is a "card vote", with votes weighted according to how much Game Fee you're paying at the moment. The Management Board recommended an increase from 32p to 34p, but you could vote for anything you liked. Voting was as follows.
25p
30p
32p
33p
34p
35p
36p
40p
50p
60p
1
2
16
25
12
6
34
14
39
4
We said there was plenty of disagreement. Of course people complained loudly that the BCF was milking chess dry, and others said just as loud that we ought to be prepared to dip our hands in our pockets. They always do. The median, or middle, vote fell in the 36p band so that's what Game Fee is from September. It may or may not be unprecedented for Council to vote for more than the MB was asking for, but it can't be wrong to say some were surprised. There was no proposal about Rapidplay or club internal fees, so they take their default values of one-half and one-third of the full rate. One-sixth, if it's both. The GF decision may have been influenced by the fact, mentioned before voting took place, that 36 divides neatly by both two and three.
It was suggested that junior events, instead of being exempt from Game Fee, might in future pay it at zero rate. The effect would be to give them the right to attend, though not vote at, Council meetings. Someone else mentioned the possibility of exempting Full Members when they play in leagues. (3) Other Fees. The MB proposed no increases, but someone did. Direct Membership fees are to go up by 10%, to the nearest £1, with effect from 1st September. There was also an unsuccessful proposal to increase, by the same amount, the fees payable by bodies whose payment is not regulated by Game Fee. (4) Budget 2003-4. The proposed budget, for a loss of £1600, was based on an assumed Game Fee of 34p. The extra 2p, together with increased income from (3), would turn this potentially into a surplus of £3500 or so. In a confused debate Council decided to revise the Game Fee and DM figures upwards but, at the same time, to delete a projected income of £7500 from sponsorship as yet unsecured. The MB had taken a deliberate decision to include this figure because the new Marketing Director (not present) was confident of raising such a sum. The result, after these adjustments, is a deficit budget of something over £4000. (5) Future Activities. The meeting had before it, and made a minor technical adjustment to, the Federation's draft Business Plan for 2003-4. The Plan will have been in line with the budget. Some Directors have volunteered, or been volunteered, to cut costs. No details of the cost-cutting were given at the meeting. However, the Junior Director said that if the National Schools (formerly Times) Championship did not get sponsorship, next season would be its last. Its Finals, though no longer in London, are very expensive.
Some economies were suggested from the floor of the meeting. One, perhaps not very realistic, was reducing the size of the Office staff. Someone else, in a different context, thought the time might come when we'd need paid Directors. (6) Future Funding. Or, do we move to a Membership Scheme with teeth? We've had this discussion before, in the early nineties. In 2003 there was no more agreement about it than there was about the level of Game Fee. Someone said the pre-Game-Fee Levy was a membership scheme and hadn't worked. His answer was to find sponsorship, if we understood him correctly. Someone else said the German Federation had 95,000 members - well, we think he said 95,000 - paying 8 euros each, and if they could do it why couldn't we? [An obvious answer is that we barely have 20,000 players, but the point's fair in principle.] As for the teeth, no one had anything to say except "grading". We're not sure which grading sanction they had in mind sometimes, or whether they always distinguished. There are basically two sanctions possible, and they are very different. But the first question is whether we want to do it. A straw poll said yes, by 17 votes to 9. Whether we kept the Game Fee would presumably depend on the level of membership fee. No decisions were made about timescale or anything else, but this is going to come up again. (7) County Matches: BCF Stage. The Home Director had two rule changes on the agenda.
(a) Amend Rule 3.5 so as to relax the qualification to play in the National Stage. This was carried after amendment, and the new rule is even less stringent than the Director had proposed. The Site's copy of the rules is updated. (In fact we noticed, a day later, that the Director has made a change he never mentioned. We feel sure he did not intend to delete the first sentence, and we've left it in.)
Theoretically it is now possible to get three qualifiers out of three by entering four extra, imaginary, teams which don't play. The Director said he would expect Union Controllers to exercise their discretion in silly cases.
(b) Amend rule 1, changing to mean grade limits (U160, U135, U110, U90). Some didn't like the idea, for various reasons. Apart from this it was felt that, even if we moved this way, it needed much more careful drafting to cover special cases (and manipulation). The Director withdrew the proposal. To be more accurate he wasn't allowed to withdraw it, because it was the property of the meeting, so someone else proposed Next Business.
To illustrate the manipulation possible, someone mentioned a (mean-grade limit) National Club match his club had played recently in which the opponents' bottom board was graded 6. The Controller was reported to have been annoyed (not the word used) on seeing this.
Manipulation's a loaded word, and maybe unfair in such cases. Bottom boards graded 6 aren't against the rules. They certainly confer an advantage, if the resulting average is just within the limit. But is this sharp practice? If the rules think so, they have only themselves to blame for not saying it. Whether the average was just within the limit, in this match, was not stated. We're talking illustrations. Maybe they were well below the limit and 6 was the strongest bottom board they could get. (8) Incidental things. A few newsworthy oddments cropped up.
(a) National Club Plate Final 2001-2. A date has been fixed! It's at Wanstead on Sunday 29th June 2003, alongside this year's Finals (or some of them?). [We said 28th June originally, and that is what was announced at the meeting. But it turns out this was an error. The Home Director has confirmed that it's the 29th.]
(b) BCF U18 Team Jamborees. We have already reported the 28th-June date, at a venue in Essex. The Director confirmed this, but said the Girls event would be one week earlier (21st) in Leicestershire. This will have been to avoid a clash with an ECGCF event.
(c) Needs of the Disabled. It was reported that the BCF Committee looking at this had folded. There was a report pending, currently with technical advisers. Bruce Birchall asked if his own minority report would be circulated, and was told it was up to the Management Board.
(d) Child Protection policy. The BCF is to pay £300 to become a registered body able to pass on names for vetting. There will be a proper name for this, but we don't know it. In the meantime it was possible to do things by other means, and there were so far four BCF Registered Coaches. This title obviously implies proven coaching ability, but no one without clearance will get it.
The Junior Director remarked on how difficult things had become. In the old days you could ask any old parent to chaperone children for distant events, but not any more. (9) Things that were Never Mentioned. We add this 1.5.03 as an afterthought, having been suddenly reminded of it in a private conversation. The Home Director said, in a widely circulated email on the 2nd March 2003, that he proposed to increase the Counties Championships entry fee to £20 (U100 £15) in the coming season. We have already mentioned this in the SCCU page. Nothing at all was said about it at the Council meeting, and we conclude the idea has been dropped. The rules of the competition leave entry fees to the Management Board, but if they had a substantial increase in mind they would hardly not tell the April Finance meeting of Council.
Note 14.5.03. Appearances were deceptive. The idea has not been dropped.
The meeting closed at 6 pm, having got through its agenda comfortably.
rjh 27.4.03, revised 14.5.03
BCF MANAGEMENT BOARD MEETING
Saturday 15th March 2003 in Birmingham
Thirteen attended and, in the continuing absence of a Chief Executive Officer, the meeting was chaired by BCF President (and acting CEO) Gerry Walsh. The following is a summary of the main issues discussed, but has no claim to be comprehensive. (1) Minutes of the previous meeting were quickly dispatched, although under matters arising it emerged that the leaflet for the 2003 BCF Championships, now printed and circulated, contained an unfortunate error in the omission of a requirement that all (English) entrants to the Championship itself and to the Major Open must be members of the BCF. It was agreed to remedy this via a notice on the BCF Website. It was also agreed that the Chairman would write to all non-BCF organised FIDE rated events to remind players that they will not receive a FIDE rating unless they are BCF members. (2) Chess in Schools. Gerry Walsh reported on a productive meeting with the Minister of Education who had agreed to do all in his power to promote chess in schools. Gerry had however been disappointed by the Royal Mail’s refusal to issue stamps for our Centenary. (3) Money. In the continuing absence of a Finance Director it fell to Finance Committee Chairman John Philpott to provide the forecast for 2002/3 together with a Budget for 2003/4. The detailed yet clear reports he tabled were welcomed by all, particularly useful being a 7 year summary of Income and Expenditure giving the “broad picture” of our finances. After adjustments it appeared that the outcome for this year would be a small deficit. The picture for next year was however much less favourable and continued activity at the present level seemed likely to lead to a substantial deficit in 2003/4. Some Directors indicated ways in which their budgets could be reduced and consultations would continue in the hope of producing a balanced budget for Council.
Various requests for funding had been received from other bodies. In view of the financial situation referred to it was agreed to include them with the Budget proposals to obtain a view from Council as to whether (and how) they should be supported. The new Marketing Director made encouraging noises re his ability to obtain funding and a number of these events would also be added to his "shopping list" for sponsorship.
There is likely to be a further public appeal this year for funding in support of participation in the European Team Championship. (4) Council Agenda. The Board reviewed the Agenda for the April meeting. The report of the Disability Policy Committee, together with Bruce Birchall’s minority report, would be referred to Croner Consulting (an independent advice organisation to which the BCF subscribes) to determine the exact responsibility of the BCF under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. Proposed rule changes from Cyril Johnson were discussed and he agreed to reduce the proposed average grading limits in the Counties Championships by 10/15 points per division. Amendments to other proposed changes could be accepted at the Council meeting. (5) Direct Members and Grading. It was agreed that Direct Members, with effect from next season, will no longer be able to send their individual games for grading from English events that do not pay Game Fee. Their overseas games will still be accepted, and it may be possible to include all FIDE-rated foreign events. (6) BCF-Stage Draw. A request from the SCCU that the draw for the Final Stages of this year’s Counties Championships revert to its original form by the withdrawal of the two additional teams in the U150 found no support after the Controller had explained his reasons. He had been unwilling to penalise these teams for other people's defaults. (7) Juniors. There was no Junior report and no opportunity to put the SCCU proposals regarding the BCF Under 18 Jamborees. I did however speak to the Junior Director after the meeting who confirmed that our proposals had his agreement, and that he would implement them. This means that the dates for next year’s Jamborees will be fixed in September 2003 and publicised at that time. He will also be open to offers from anyone prepared to run these Jamborees next year. He also confirmed that he has accepted Peter Walker’s offer to run the 2003 Jamborees which I understand are scheduled to take place on 28th June 2003 in Saffron Walden.
David Smith
SCCU Representative
18th March 2003
BCF MANAGEMENT BOARD MEETING
London, Saturday 25th January 2003
Fourteen attended, including myself, the meeting being chaired by BCF President (and acting Chief Executive Officer) Gerry Walsh.
Advertisements in the chess press for the vacant posts of Chief Executive Officer, Director of Finance and Director of Management Services had produced no response and efforts would continue to find suitable candidates to fill these posts. There had however been one application for the position of Marketing Director and the Board agreed to appoint Mr David Levens, a former Publicity Officer of the Nottinghamshire Chess Association, to the post. Mr Brian Smith, attending the meeting as an alternate for Mr Alan Martin of the London Chess League, volunteered to assist the new Marketing Director in his activities.
One of the main items on the Agenda for the January Board meeting is traditionally Planning and Strategy, and efforts were made to “clear the decks” to enable a full discussion to take place. Time was however found to consider a number of routine Agenda items including the following:
Minutes of the Council meeting held 26th October 2002 were suitably amended to enable their scheduled publication on the BCF Website on Monday 27th January 2003.
Finance Committee Chairman John Philpott gave an interim report on the current financial position of the Federation, indicating that there were a number of individual variances from budget but that overall the BCF seemed to be heading for a reasonable financial outcome for 2002/3. Game Fee was likely to fall short of the budgeted figure and internet income had not materialised, but there were favourable developments in a number of Directorates, and in particular the British Championships in Torquay were expected to produce a healthy surplus.
Agreement was given to the Affiliation to the BCF of the Basildon Chess Congress, and also to the elevation of Messrs. Geoff Jones, John Robinson, David Thomas and John Turnock to the position of BCF Senior Arbiters.
The item devoted to Planning and Strategy took the form of a “brainstorming” session where the topics discussed ranged far and wide. The Management Board is very well aware of the need to improve its image with chess players at all levels, from the grass-roots to the GM’s, and various ways to achieve this were discussed. In particular the Board recognises the need to get over to the ordinary club player just what the Federation does for all sections of the chess-playing community. Investigations will be carried out to determine the success (or otherwise) of Game-Fee as opposed to the other methods of raising funds via membership schemes.
I am pleased to report that there is a new spirit abroad in the conduct of these meetings. Whilst there were, naturally, differences of opinion, debate was conducted in a courteous and co-operative manner, which can only augur well for the future.
David Smith
SCCU Representative
27th January 2003
BCF MANAGEMENT BOARD MEETING
30 November 2002
The Board met, with Gerry Walsh in the chair, at Bradford City FC on the same day as the British Rapidplay Championships were taking place, with an adjournment to attend the opening ceremony. Business proceeded with good humour and with almost unprecedented despatch early on, with a prompt start at 10.00 a.m., the minutes of the three previous meetings approved by 10.32 a.m. and all matters arising dealt with by 11.35 a.m. Progress slowed down somewhat thereafter and despite an extension of the finishing time from the scheduled 5.00 p.m. to 5.45 p.m. there was unfortunately insufficient time for a full discussion of the corporate plan.
There was extended discussion of a paper by Stewart Reuben on the BCF’s forthcoming centenary in 2004. The ideas discussed will be taken forward by a committee comprising Stewart Reuben, Pam Thomas, John Philpott, Gerry Walsh and Claire Summerscale.
The 30 April 2002 accounts, which had been referred to the Finance Committee for further consideration of three issues, were approved unanimously.
The removal of ratings from FIDE-rated players who are not direct members of the BCF is now targeted for the March 2003 list, with adequate prior warning to be given. It was noted that there was a significant cost to the BCF for each English player with an international rating.
Various committees were appointed.
Disabled - Cyril Johnson (convenor), Bruce Birchall and Gerry Walsh plus nominees of the Braille Chess Association and the English Deaf Chess Association.
Personnel - Claire Summerscale (convenor), David Smith, Ray Clark and Peter Turner.
Awards - John Wickham (convenor), John Dunleavy, Stan Goodall and Gerry Walsh.
Governance - John Dunleavy (convenor), John Paines and John Philpott.
Chess as a sport - Gerry Walsh, John Philpott and Claire Summerscale.
Information technology (incorporating Internet Chess) - Chris Majer (convenor), Cyril Johnson, Bob Veitch, John Paines, David Thomas, Mark Snowden and Steve Henderson.
Adult team selection - Stewart Reuben, David Norwood, Ray Edwards, Nigel Short and Harriet Hunt.
Senior team selection - Stewart Reuben, John Littlewood, Ray Edwards and David Anderton.
Sponsorship - Gerry Walsh, Neil Graham, Peter Turner and Stewart Reuben.
Significant progress was made in developing a revised set of responsibilities for the BCF President and Officers.
Dates for 2003 Board meetings were agreed for 25 January in London (to concentrate on strategy), 15 March in Birmingham, 26 April pre-Council in London, 28 June in Nottingham, 27 September pre-Council in the EACU and 8 November in Birmingham.
John Philpott
BCF COUNCIL MEETING
in Leeds, 26th October 2002
rjh 28.10.02, amended 30.10.02
Council met, and forty-something attended, which seems to be about the norm.
Three resignations were announced before business began. Susan Richards, the CEO, said she had decided not to offer herself for re-election. She spoke of discord on the Management Board and the circulation of unpleasant emails among its members. It would be hard for her to continue as CEO, given that she was considering legal action against a certain Director (whom she named, but we will not) in respect of one of these. But the atmosphere on the Board had been, anyway, so confrontational she saw no useful purpose in continuing. Robert McFarland, Director of Finance and Management Services, who has worked closely with the CEO, spoke likewise of confrontation and said he would not continue. Nick Hawkins, the Marketing Director, said he had given these two officers an undertaking that if they went, he would; and he honoured this commitment. He was asked to reconsider, but would not.
A number of people spoke from the floor in warm appreciation of these officers' work, and no one voiced dissent. Someone suggested that the meeting, instead of devoting itself to routine matters, should investigate what had brought about this state of affairs culminating in the loss of three trusted officers. The suggestion mercifully was not taken up. Readers will know that things had long been coming to a head - indeed, unpleasantness erupted in the papers of the meeting - and now it's done this Website would like to think the matter's closed. After a quarter of an hour the three officers left the meeting.
The meeting that ensued bore no resemblance to the previous one in April. The three-minute timer, introduced perhaps in response to April's events, admonished one Director ("Oh, I've lost on time"), and was thereafter silent. Maybe it was switched off as unneeded, because we're sure one or two other people went over the three minutes. But not by much, and the meeting in consequence got almost fusslessly through the agenda, if with some haste at the end as always. Main items: (1) Minutes of the April meeting did not occupy too much time, and the only reason we mention it is that someone felt we should also have been discussing the minutes of the last Annual meeting. There was a time when Annual meetings did Annual meetings. But a proposal to revert to this next year was heavily defeated, no doubt because of the time lag. The minutes of the Annual meeting will go on being dealt with in April. They will, however, also be circulated for the following Annual meeting. (2) Money. In the absence of the Finance Director, discussion of the Accounts was led by the Chairman of the Finance Committee. He felt that the Accounts, in their present form, tended to mask two or three problems. One of these is the decline in income from Game Fee. The outcome was that Council (recognising, we think, that the Accounts were accurate at bottom) approved them subject to amendments in presentation which would be worked on by the Finance Committee and offered to the Management Board for approval. The Accounts have not yet been signed by the Auditor.
The Chairman of the Finance Committee, in conjunction with the London League, proposed a revised set of Financial Standing Instructions. These apply to the Directors (and Management Board) in the day-to-day handling of budgets. The new set was designed to introduce checks and balances by giving more teeth to the Finance Committee. It had already been suggested, by the retiring CEO, that the new set was unworkable. Some Directors had, indeed, expressed reservations. However it emerged at the meeting that their doubts had since been allayed and that nobody (if we understood correctly) was now unhappy. Council approved the new set. (3) Grading: the BCF/FIDE conversion. Harry Lamb of the Manchester & District CA said the new conversion (for BCF less than 216, BCF x 5 + 1250 = FIDE) was both confusing and wrong. Confusing because it had not been made clear that it applied only to FIDE and not to national Elo ratings, and wrong because the graph just had to have a gradient of 8 not 5, and if the data didn't fit that, it was the data's fault. In fact data were missing because of FIDE's 2000 cutoff, and he felt sure the old formula would work if everything was there. He spoke as a professional whose work involved expertise in statistics. He said the 4NCL had just decided to have nothing to do with the new formula. [There are two letters about this, dated 26th and 27th October, in Open Forum.]
The Director replied that what the 4NCL did internally was its own business. The formula applied only to grading. As for the data misfit, he had preferred to go along with what was available.
Deputy Director Dave Thomas of Birmingham, who had been largely responsible for work on the new formula, said he had sympathy with Harry Lamb's views and would have invited his collaboration had he known of his expertise. Someone suggested inviting him onto the grading team now, but he said his work commitments forbade it. (4) Grading: the new system. Don't be alarmed, nothing really new is happening except that the transitional "hybrid" system will probably be phased out this year in favour of the re-written software originally prepared by Chris Howell. Someone asked whether this was just a re-vamp or something completely new, and how did we know it wasn't going to be a disaster? Dave Thomas said it was between a re-vamp and a novelty: essentially the Chris Howell system but completely rebuilt by Howard Grist to remove some fundamental flaws. The Director said the system would be thoroughly tested on last year's data and would not be put into use until everyone, not just the programmer, was completely satisfied. He was very confident.
Someone said, on a different topic, that next year's list should include a "Best-X" Rapidplay list for juniors. (5) National Club Championship. The Director apologised for a total mix-up about one of last year's Minor Plate semi-finals, which has not been played even now. (We don't know if it will be. The Director said he would talk to the clubs about it.)
For 2002-3 he announced that he would go on accepting entries for a few more days. In fact the Open and Major draws are out, but a new pairing has already been squeezed into the Major to accommodate two late entries. The Minor should be under way shortly.
Someone asked if there is provision for appeals against a Controller's decisions. There isn't, as he probably knew, but the Director said he would always allow appeals in the interests of justice. (6) Joint proposal on elections. You will know about the joint proposal, or if you didn't it's (2) in the next item down. In the new circumstances the proposal was not very contentious and it was carried easily. However the meeting was not unanimous on the merits of splitting these two jobs. Someone said the Board's proposal to do so was clearly motivated by personalities, and your Webmaster is sure he was right. It was also remarked that the people in the Office liked having just one boss rather than two. (The Director of Management Services is their official boss, but so much of their work is financial that they effectively have a boss there as well.) Someone else said the one office you mustn't combine things with is Finance Director. (7) Elections. President Gerry Walsh CEO. No candidate came forward, and it was left to the Board to find someone. The President would be responsible in the meantime. Finance Director. As CEO above, but for "President" substitute "Finance Committee". Director of Management Services. As CEO above. It was said that the Office hardly needs a boss with this hat on anyway. Marketing. No election was made. Women's Chess Claire Summerscale; Grading Chris Majer; Congress Chess Neil Graham; Home Cyril Johnson; International Stewart Reuben; Junior Peter Turner; Coaching Matthew Turner; FIDE Delegate Gerry Walsh Chairman, Finance Committee John Philpott; members as before plus Ian Bates (Cheshire) Chairman, Constitution Committee Paul Buswell; members as before Auditor Geoff Steele
There was some discussion about the Director who had been named in connection with legal action. But it was justly said that you don't hang a Director for an offence he may never even be charged with, and he was re-elected comfortably enough.
The vacancies would be advertised promptly, and consideration would have to be given to the mainstream chess publications as well as BCF ones. (8) Responsibilities of Officers. It was agreed to stick with last year's job descriptions, but these were exceptional times and the descriptions would have to be interpreted with common sense and good will. There was some discussion about the merits of having both a President and a CEO. (9) Meetings 2003. Finance: 26th April in London; Annual: 27th September at Peterborough. It was agreed that this year's excursion into October should not be repeated. The object had been to avoid last-minute rushes with preparations, and this had not been achieved. (10) Grading copyright charge. The Director's proposal lost out to the SCCU one, and the charge will not be made. (11) Needs of the disabled at chess events. Bruce Birchall spoke on the SCCU's proposal that the BCF form a committee to look at this, and it was carried heavily in a slightly amended form. (12) Central venues in Counties Championship Finals. The SCCU proposal to make these optional was lost. The remainder of this paragraph is added 30.10.02, in response to a request in Open Forum for more detail. Discussion was quite brief. It was getting on towards 6 o'clock. David Smith spoke to the motion, and Neil Graham spoke against. (Yes, all right, he's from the Midlands.) Possibly one other person spoke more briefly in between, we're not sure. Neil argued that central venues are (a) much more enjoyable than poky village halls, and (b) a bait for sponsors, and Council then voted by show of hands. The majority was clear, or so your Webmaster was informed by SCCU people (he wasn't sure). No, he doesn't know which regions voted which way. (13) Proposal by the Arbiters Association. This is (4) in the next article down. Your Webmaster was going to ask what it was about and why, but he blinked and it went through on the nod in two seconds in the end-of-meeting rush. (14) Constitutional changes. The meeting agreed some changes, mostly tidying-up, and rejected a couple about quorums. We'll spare you the details. (15) Committee Chairmen. It was agreed that the Chairmen of the Finance and Constitution Committees should henceforth have the right to attend and speak (but not vote) at meetings of the Management Board. (16) Awards. The following were announced. Presidents Awards Peter Burnett of Norfolk; Jack Beard of Bristol; and Chris Murray of Manchester. But details have already been published on the BCF website. Club of the Year Checkmate (MCCU) Small Club of the Year Royston (Herts). We don't think details have been published for these. BCET Schools Awards: It was stated that at least one award had been made, but details were not available.
The BCF site has carried announcements of two new awards: Chess Magazine of the Year and Chess Website of the Year. You nominate yourself, as we believe is the case with Club(s) of the Year. It isn't the case with BCET or Presidents Awards.
Council at 5.30 pm had opted for the extension from 6 to 6.30, considering what remained of the massive agenda. The meeting closed at 6.05 with everything done, leaving at least one person wondering how he was going to occupy his time until his train left. Your Webmaster, having come by car, used his by getting lost in Leeds.
BCF COUNCIL MEETING
in Leeds, 26th October 2002
No, we'll report it when it's happened. But the papers arrived on Saturday 5th October, bang on schedule, and there's no harm in mentioning one or two items on the agenda. We've put them in agenda order, but the numbering's ours. The agenda's goes up to 24. (1) Money. The Accounts (along with some of the Officers' Reports received late) aren't with the papers and are to follow in a week's time. This is stated to be "principally the result of a cancelled Audit visit planned for August, and rearranged due to our auditor's other commitments to September". Your Webmaster would suggest you look also at item 6 in the next meeting down. (2) Elections. We've been keeping a bit quiet about this, though we've dropped the odd hint. There is a joint proposal by NCCU, SCCU, WECU and the Chairman of the Constitution Committee, that the Directorships of Finance and Management Services be split (though the same person could still be appointed to both).
The background to this is set out by the proposers. (But we've updated a bit to include things that hadn't happened, or were unclear, when they wrote.) In short they're claiming that the Chief Executive hasn't carried out the wishes of the Management Board. The Board resolved in June to advertise two separate posts, but at the end of August the Chief Executive advertised a combined one.
When asked why, the Chief Executive said she had had to set the June resolution aside because she thought it unconstitutional (for reasons we won't go into). She also said she had telephoned many (but not all) of the Board members around the time the advertisement appeared, and had obtained majority agreement. Whatever the merits of this style of decision-making, it seems to have got the wrong answer in this case. The June resolution was entirely constitutional. The Constitution Committee (which she had not consulted) has since formed this view. That your Webmaster agrees with the Committee will come as no surprise, since he's a member of it.
It appears later to have been suggested, we don't know who by, that the Board never made that resolution anyway. The Board's answer to this is in the second paragraph of the next report down.
The proposers argue that candidates may have been prevented from coming forward who might have wished to stand for one or other of the posts separately. Accordingly they propose that fresh advertisements should be published, and that any elections made now to these posts should be until January (or April) only. At the time the papers went out the only candidate, for the combined post, was the incumbent. However, there is no deadline.
The proposers say nothing about any politics there may be behind all this. (3) Grading Copyright Charge. Curiously the SCCU's proposal on this (abolish the charge) is immediately followed by one from the Director (confirm the charge). This probably isn't as silly as it looks. Each proposer will have acted without knowledge of what the other was doing. (4) Rules and Regulations. The Arbiters Association, supported by the WECU, proposes "That Council should instruct the British Chess Federation Management Board to thoroughly review and revise all its playing rules and regulations, reporting progress back to the next annual council meeting".
We've been trying to think what playing rules and regulations the BCF has, apart from the rules of its various competitions (which mostly aren't about playing at all). Help, anyone? (5) Committee Chairmen. The London Chess League and WECU propose that the Chairmen of the Standing Committees (that is, Finance and Constitution) should have the right to attend and speak (but not vote) at Management Board meetings.
rjh 7.10.02, amended 24.10.02
BCF MANAGEMENT BOARD MEETING
Saturday 28th September 2002 in Birmingham
Eighteen attended including myself, and I have to confess that I have attended more entertaining events held on my birthday. However, the tone was noticeably better than that of some recent meetings, most participants having heeded the Chief Executive's plea that more courtesy and restraint be exercised in the conduct of our business.
Inevitably, it now seems, a considerable amount of time was spent discussing the minutes of earlier meetings, with much debate on what had actually been agreed at the June Board meeting. It was however eventually confirmed that the Board had agreed that the positions of Director of Finance and Director of Management Services should be advertised as two separate posts, although it was emphasised that any applicant was at liberty to apply for both positions if they were so inclined.1
The following is a summary of the main decisions taken, in particular those affecting chess at grass roots level, and not necessarily in the order taken at the meeting. (1) Challenging for Gold Appeal has raised £1,700 (42% of target) and will be further promoted to Constituent Units and Leagues by the Chief Executive. (2) English Championship. It was agreed that as from the Centenary year, 2004, there will be an "English" Championship for the top players. Details of the format were not finalised, but it will be an entirely separate event, at a different venue and time of year, from the "British Championship(s)" which will continue in its present form for the foreseeable future. However, the Constitution Committee would be asked to examine and report on the links between "English", "British" and "Commonwealth" players for the January Board meeting. (3) Awards. It was agreed to institute two new Awards: a Chess Magazine of the Year and a Website of the Year Award, criteria to be decided by the Awards Committee. (4) Newly affiliated Congresses include John Harradence Memorial and Surrey Classic. (5) Grading. The Director referred to copyright of the BCF List which will be discussed further at the October Council meeting. His proposals to appoint Richard Haddrell as Grading Database Manager and Alan Ruffle as Grading Officer were agreed. (6) Money. Draft Accounts for 2001/2002 were tabled for discussion. An initial surplus of £7K had become a deficit of £8K after exceptional items. Game Fee collected for the year was stated to be £5k lower than expected. A number of comments from the Chairman of the Finance Committee were noted and it was agreed that further amendments to the draft would be required after consultations between the Finance Director, the Finance Committee Chairman and Mike O'Hara FCA of the Northern Counties CU.
Current membership of the BCF was stated to be 1193 as at 31st August 2002.
David Smith
SCCU Representative
30th September 2002 1 rjh: You may have noticed that these jobs have been advertised as a combined post. There's been a bit of a fuss about it.
BCF MANAGEMENT BOARD MEETING
in Nottingham, 22nd June 2003
We have no report of this meeting. (They haven't [6.10.02] actually agreed the minutes of it yet, not that we'd have waited for that.) There are one or two snippets in the SCCU page under Executive Committee 6.9.02.
BCF COUNCIL MEETING
rjh 29.4.02, amended 1.5.02
Council met in Birmingham on Saturday 27th April 2002. Forty-odd attended.
To begin at the ending, a certain Director had been waiting patiently to give his Report. He found himself left with four minutes before the 6.30 pm absolute deadline. "At least I'll get my four minutes' worth in," he said. Then another MB person, not notably silent up to this point, saw an opportunity to add to the previous item... and used the four minutes up.
This was perhaps the most unattractive BCF meeting your Webmaster has been at. The culprits were a small number of members of the Management Board who spoke long and often, with no apparent regard for other potential speakers or the expeditious completion of business. A lot of it was in-fighting, plainly done already in the decent obscurity of MB meetings where its prolixities might have best remained.
We had a guest speaker at the meeting. He sat through an hour and a half of this before his turn came to speak, and if the BCF had decided in advance to make the worst possible impression on him it could scarcely have done a better job. He was talking about how to gain sponsorship.
Yes. Anyway. What did we do? (1) Game Fee. The MB's recommendation of 32p from 1st September 2002 (increase from 30p) was approved. Voting:
0p
25p
30p
31p
32p
4
3
30
31
94
The Rapidplay fee, in default of any decision to the contrary, is one half of this. There was no motion to the contrary. The default for internal Club games is one third (or one sixth if it's Rapidplay). There was a motion to the contrary: make it 10p (or 5p) for simplicity. It was lost, for simplicity. (2) BCF Membership. It was proposed that the following categories of people be required to be BCF Direct Members, from a starting date which was doubtless specified but your Webmaster can't find it. (a) Members of the Management Board; (b) BCF officers as defined in the Yearbook; (c) players representing England on the BCF's behalf.
No one much objected to (c). But there were reservations about MB people who were merely representing Unions and other bodies. Well, perhaps their "bodies" would pay a membership fee for them. But still there were all the individual (and vaguely defined) officers who ran things for the Federation for nothing and might object to being charged twelve quid for the privilege. It went back to the shop.
The MB while reconsidering will also bear in mind other, longer-term, NCCU proposals leading to exclusion of non-Members from the grading list. The original NCCU proposal was inexplicit about what this meant, and one imagines the MB will consider all options. There are at least two fundamentally different ways of doing it.
There was a feeling that it would be different if all serious players were members, and if there were not also a separate taxation via Game Fee. Any transitional period is likely to be difficult. A League person said, "If my League achieves 100% Direct Membership, can we hold on to our Game Fee?" The top table's answer was that it was a possibility. We weren't sure how to take that, but we've learned since that it really has been discussed seriously in MB circles. Not with any consensus, we don't think. Someone else suggested a straw poll to see if Council favoured ("universal") Direct Membership in principle. But there are so many ifs and buts it came to nothing.
You've been waiting for us to tell you how many Direct Members there are, in the new Standard and Junior categories. No figure was volunteered, but we asked and it's 199. Figures for the older categories were not available. It used to be about 1000, if memory serves. Apparently the MB has been pressing the Finance Director for this information for some time. There was a suggestion that he cause it to be placed on the BCF Website immediately after the end of the financial year on the 30th April, and at one point we thought this had been agreed. We became less sure as discussion proceeded. However, our information is that it will be done anyway. (3) BCF Membership: FIDE-rated players. The MB proposal on this went through. See the next meeting down. This has not been unopposed. See the BCM site 3.5.02, not to mention our own Open Forum. (4) Money
(a) The budget 2002-3 was approved, and things were said about the Accounts. You'll forgive us if we skate over this. But the Chairman of the Finance Committee remarked that the break-even figure presented for the budget masked a fall of £4000 in reserves. (Is that what they call creative accounting?)
(b) There was a joint proposal, by the WECU and the London League, to the effect that the Finance Director and CEO be required to ensure that detailed financial information (more detailed, in fact) is available to the MB in advance of meetings, rather than just tabled as hitherto. Moreover the proposal called for independent certification to Council that it had been done. This item made waves at the start, because it had been placed at the bottom of the agenda and its proposers wanted it moved up so it wouldn't be crowded out for lack of time. We'd have had no occasion to mention this, had the Finance Director and CEO not spoken for a good five minutes between them explaining why it should not be moved up. It was moved up by an overwhelming majority after that. It was also carried when we got to it, by a majority which was healthy but not overwhelming.
(c) Council approved an MB proposal to make "up to £5000" available for Centenary celebrations in 2004.
(d) The "Challenging for Gold" appeal, launched we think in the last ChessMoves, is now up to about £450.
(e) The draft Standing Financial Instructions were not adopted. They came right at the end of the meeting, and got filibustered out. (5) Sponsorship. Council heard an informative 30-minute presentation by Simon Scott of the Sports Sponsorship Advisory Service. This was essentially advice on how to go about securing sponsorship, and it would be of interest to small local organisations no less than large national ones. Rather than summarise his presentation we will refer readers to the SSAS's website www.sponsorship-advice.org. (6) Business Plan 2002-3 was adopted. Someone remarked that the only Director it didn't specify targets for was the Finance Director, but perhaps that was part of the in-fighting. The Chairman of the Finance Committee, while commending the Federation on presenting a Business Plan to Council for the first time, felt that it was only a first step. In particular he regretted that there is no current (three-year) Corporate Plan to inform it. (7) Conduct of Management Board and Council Meetings. We really ought not to mention this, because it was crowded out. But an item with that title was tabled by the CEO at the start of the meeting. It stated: "I have been concerned for some time about the conduct and behaviour of a few individuals which have been such as to disrupt the smooth running of the business of Board and Council meetings regardless of who is in the chair. There is also a related concern about conduct outside meetings too."
We have nothing to say about conduct outside meetings, but record with pleasure our full agreement with the CEO about conduct in them.
You will have gathered that Council opted for the 30-minute extension to 6.30, and that even then there were agenda items that didn't get in. John Philpott has some reflections on this in Open Forum. The MB had adjourned their morning session, and resumed when Council had gone. They were still at it when we left at 7.15 after a meeting of our own.
Your Webmaster is sorry if this report has been subjective even by his standards. It was a nice room, and the hotel was easy to get to.