BCF EXTRAORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING
in London, Saturday 24th June 2006 at 1 pm. About 28 attended.
The BCF has remained in existence largely for financial reasons and will rarely, we imagine, have need for a General meeting between AGMs. This one arose from a bequest to the Federation from the late John Robinson. It is substantial - around £650,000 - and represents the bulk of John's estate. He was a bachelor and died without issue. Inheritance tax on such a sum would cost the Federation something like £300,000. But apparently it is possible to vary the terms of the will so that the biggest part of the bequest goes into a charitable trust, avoiding liability to inheritance tax. Setting up such a trust requires a resolution of Council.
The proposed John Robinson Trust would receive about £520,000 while £130,000 would go to the BCF itself. But the charitable trust has to be a Junior one. John's expressed wish is that his bequest will provide £10,000 annually to support the British Championships. There is a considerable youth element in the Championships which can properly be supported by a junior trust, and the two sources together could achieve the £10,000.
We said, when we saw the papers of the meeting, that we had no doubt the setting up of the Trust would go through on the nod. The grapevine wasn't so sure. It seems there was opposition to a scheme which would benefit mostly juniors when there were other ways of doing it. We have no information on the other ways. In the event one Director did express reservations along those lines at the meeting, but the proposals all went through with the odd abstention here and there but, we think, no votes against.
The Trustees will be Gerry Walsh, David Welch, Cynthia Gurney and David Anderton.
rjh 1.7.06
ECF EXTRAORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING
in London, Saturday 24th June 2006 twenty minutes after the foregoing. About 42 attended. (Entitlement to attend is more embracing at ECF meetings than BCF ones.)
The meeting was about possible "membership schemes", extending the Northern Membership Scheme to other parts of the country from 2006-7.
It was an unpleasant meeting. The background to it, or a huge part of the background, was the ECF's recent decision to terminate the NMS when the pilot scheme expires 31st August 2006. The ECF Board had kept very quiet about this, though reports were circulating in the north of England very soon after it happened. You will know, or see 22.4.06 further down if you didn't, that the April Council meeting resolved to continue the NMS subject to satisfactory agreement with the NCCU. A meeting was duly held a week later, at the end of April, between the NCCU team and four members of the Board. What happened at this meeting is not clear. A couple of weeks later, the Board resolved that ECF could not accept the financial demands made by NCCU. The upshot, after fruitless further communication, was the termination of the NMS agreement.
So what did happen at the end-April meeting? A report widely and swiftly circulated in the north has it that the ECF representatives made financial commitments which the Board subsequently refused to honour. The Board made no response, publicly at least, until asked point blank at the Extraordinary meeting. Three of the Directors at the end-April meeting then said they did not feel any commitment had been made, and the fourth disagreed. He resigned from the Board shortly after its decision to terminate.
It is a sorry tale, and we will not go into the detail of the agreements, documented or not, which the parties may have entered into and defaulted on. Your Webmaster will only say he thinks neither side has been without fault. It remains to pick up the pieces, and any future agreements will need to be much more tightly negotiated.
The meeting had before it some amendments to the Articles and Bye-Laws which would permit the setting up of NMS-type schemes anywhere in the country, on a County or Union or League basis according to demand. They would be entirely voluntary.
The first amendment descended into comedy. It required a 75% majority, and it came in two apparently independent parts. The first was to delete some words of Article 5 relating to the Northern Membership Scheme. The second was to replace them by others providing for Membership schemes more generally. You have guessed what happened. There was first a proposal, narrowly defeated, to take the two parts backwards. The first part then failed, after what may have been a recount or it may have been a revote, narrowly missing the 75% both times. So the words remained undeleted. The second part was then carried heavily, in effect deleting them by replacement. We do not know who drew up the Agenda.
The meeting then passed to Bye-Laws requiring only a simple majority. The proposals were broadly those applying to the current NMS, except that they would be open to any County or League or Union. Participating organisations would be expected to use their best endeavours (a watered-down amendment) to ensure that all players would become ("basic") ECF Members. Membership fees would be collected by the organisation concerned. It was initially proposed that a 2½% discount be applied for payments made by 31st October, but on a Board amendment this was changed to 10%. It was also initially proposed that Game Fee would be waived in respect of basic Members playing in their organisations' participitating events. This was amended, at the meeting, to "would be waived full stop". Your Webmaster is not clear that this is consistent with other Bye-Laws which were not amended.
At some point before this last resolution, two NCCU people (you might say "the" NCCU people, bcause they held a lot of proxies) left the room. They returned at some point after it and their chosen spokesman made the NCCU's feelings very clear. They had come along hoping for a friendly and constructive dialogue and had encountered a comedy show. They may not have used these exact words. They were extremely disappointed and would now leave. It was then made known to them that in their absence they had missed the "waived full stop" resolution, and they were invited to reconsider. Your Webmaster does not know what their position now is, but they did not leave. They remained until the end of the meeting, some 15 minutes later.
Which was at 5:04 pm. We believe the Board had a meeting afterwards, but the Board is not given to open communication.
It won't stop there. Already we hear noises that Game Fee discounts for prompt payment should be at 10%. What the NCCU's position on the whole thing will be, we don't know. They are talking about it on the NCCU website.
This report has been written in haste, and your Webmaster will be happy to correct errors and important omissions. He may get things wrong, and he leaves things out when he's a mind to, but he doesn't knowingly misrepresent.
rjh 1.7.06
ECF FINANCE COUNCIL MEETING UPDATE
11.5.06
See the next Report down (item 7). We expressed some doubts about the concessionary rates of Game Fee. The ECF site's report of the April meeting, which has just appeared, does not dispel them. So we asked the ECF Finance Director, and his answer is:
Standard
Rapidplay
Club
Junior Standardplay
Junior Rapidplay
Junior Club
Junior Club Rapidplay
45p
23p
15p
23p
12p
8p
4p
(We have inserted Junior Club Rapidplay, which the Director omitted, but we guess we've inserted correctly.)
This is the first definitive statement of the rates since Council voted. The Director has rounded fractions up as we suspected he would. It is a pity his statement has been needed. Council sets the Game Fee, and it is entirely Council's fault if it does it so inexplicitly that the Finance Director has to rule on what Council meant. Well, perhaps not entirely. The Board must take responsibility for the laxness of proceedings.
ECF FINANCE COUNCIL MEETING
22.4.06 at Luton
Council duly met, under the chairmanship of Gerry Walsh. 35 attended if we counted right. Before proceedings began, Members stood in silence in memory of Steve Boniface and John Robinson. (1) Proxies & Apologies for absence. An innovation. The meeting, for once, did not devote five minutes to their reading out. The lists just went on the wall where anyone who wanted could look at them. An excellent idea and, as is often the way with excellent ideas, one wonders why no one ever thought of it before. (2) ECF Grand Prix. A good half hour was spent on this. The Home Director proposed reducing the competition to U175, U150, U125, U100 and Junior as noted under (1) two Reports down. Proposed prizes were per section. We wondered, until 24 hours after the meeting, how many takers there would be for the second prize in the U100. But it turns out the second prizes can be applied to any event at the British Championship Congress. (The Agenda really did say British Championship, though the supporting paper didn't, and we believed the Agenda.)
The cost to the Federation would be about £1000, which seems to mean mostly the prize fund. Or entirely the prize fund, depending how you look at it. One cost-cutting measure would be to simplify the rules and have calculations done by the central grading system in a manner not specified. It was remarked that this would mean the leader boards could not be kept up to date, because congresses are often far from prompt in reporting their grading results. However the Manager of Congress Chess said the leader boards have not been notably up to date this season anyway, so the loss would be small.
Opinion was polarised. More than one person said professional players were upset by the proposal to exclude them. Someone replied that there is only one professional player in England, but perhaps his definition of the term is narrow. Someone else, with a broader one, said the first-string professionals were mostly not involved with the GP. At least one person thought the amateurs would regret the inevitable loss of top players in their events, and at least one other thought they would welcome it. ("The numbers go up in our part of the world when the GMs aren't there to snaffle all the prizes.")
But there was an Amendment. To the effect that the GP be abolished altogether. This went 11 - 11 on a show of hands and the Chairman cast against. Then it went to a card vote, and lost again (70 - 76).
Then another amendment, to the effect that the GP continue but be entirely funded by the congresses taking part. This "private" GP was rejected 9 - 14, and the Director's proposal then agreed by 11 votes to 5. (3) Annual Business Plan 2006-7. It's not often Council spends 20 minutes discussing a Business Plan. We thought everyone knew they're supposed to be vacuous. We won't report what was said, except that someone observed it's mostly the same every year and asked if the new bits could be italicised in future, and Council agreed to it. That will make the civil servants sit up. (4) Budget. The Budget did not actually get approved until a few items further down, but we'll say it now. The discussions happened here. They took 55 minutes and ranged widely. Some items:
(a) Direct Members & FIDE rating. Somebody objected to the fact that ECF Membership is required for all players in FIDE-rated events. It was explained that it stems from FIDE requirements. Somehow, discussion turned to Northern (or Basic) Members who won't sign their ECF Membership forms. But it comes up later.
(b) ECF-funded Women's team in 4NCL. Someone asked why the funding didn't show up in the Budget figures. (Finance Director: it's just got accidentally hidden in something else.) Someone else was concerned that this money had been spent at all, especially as few people knew about it. (You didn't? It's Pride & Prejudice. It is not strictly a women's team, because the 4NCL rules don't allow it, and has a token GM male on board 1.) It appears that top women have declined to play for Pride & Prejudice, preferring loyalty to other teams. [Note. We have since learned that the token-male rule does not apply in Division 4, which is where Pride & Prejudice were.]
(c) Northern Members again. The NMS has brought in considerably more money from the North than Game Fee did last year, about £3000 more we think, and Bill O'Rourke felt that the excess should be spent on developing, or supporting, Northern events. The Board does not agree. (The number of Northern Members stands, or did then, at 1661.) (5) Direct Membership subscriptions are to remain unchanged, as recommended by the Board. (6) Minimum Membership fee for Member organisations. The Board proposed that it remain at £50. A BWCA member said her organisation had been shocked to be asked to pay this year. They never had before. It was suggested that the Board should have power to waive or reduce the fee for smaller organisations. The original proposal was carried, with an amendment to the effect that the Board should "look at this". Whether this gives the Board the right to waive or reduce, we don't know. (7) Game Fee 2006-7. Council voted twice on this. First, oddly, to note the Board's recommendation of 45p (up from 44p). It noted it as requested, then voted again to decide what Game Fee should actually be. The second vote was a card one. It was 3.45 and the tellers told in the tea break.
£1 34
50p 7
48p 2
45p 105
44p 35
40p 1
£1 got a lot more votes than last year's 6. Perhaps all 34 of them came from Northern Members. But the median vote was for 45p, and that's what Game Fee is from 1st September 2006.
That's standard rate. What are the reduced rates for Rapidplay etc? No vote was taken. The Articles are silent, but a note in the Agenda covered it. It said that in the absence of a decision to the contrary Rapidplay would remain at one-half of the standard rate. That's clear. It is at one-half and will remain so. 22½ pence. (The word "rounding" has not been mentioned.) But now look at club internal. It gets exactly the same note, barring a one-third instead of a one-half. But "remain"? Club internal isn't currently at one-third rate. It's one-third, rounded up to the next whole number.
As it happens, 45 divides by 3 and no one's going to try rounding club internal. But what is the Board's intention for Rapidplay? Will it do exactly what the Agenda said, and call it 22½ pence? Or will it take the view that club internal's (incorrect) "remain" means that the 2005-6 principle will "remain" and fractional rates will be rounded up? Nothing in the agenda says this, but we have a feeling the Board may.
Your Webmaster is annoyed with himself for not spotting this anomaly before. (8) Review of Northern Membership Scheme. This took an hour, and tensions were obvious. At one point a Northern person attacked another Northern person for not mentioning the NMS at his County's AGM. The Board took no position on the proposals it had put - see below - and there was no need to guess why. A Director said why. It was split down the middle.
No one doubts that the NMS has been a financial success, but this wasn't about that. The Board made two proposals. The first was to authorise negotiations with the NCCU with a view to establishing a new class of player to be called "Registered Players", and the second was to extend the NMS to 31st August 2007. The two seemed to get intertwined in discussion, and we have treated them together.
Registered Players would be the Northern Members who have not signed an application for ECF Membership. Signing is now a legal requirement if they are to be (basic) Members as provided by the April 2005 Council meeting that set the whole thing up. However, only a small proportion of NMs have actually signed. Many, it seems, just aren't interested in the ECF and object to being told they must join it. Their entitlement to ECF benefits is technically nil if they aren't Members. The proposed new class of (non-Member) player would solve this by giving them all benefits except the right to FIDE rating (prohibited by FIDE) and the right to elect DM reps.
A related problem, perhaps going with the second proposal rather than the first, is that the NCCU has refused to supply the addresses of NMs because of doubts about data protection. It seems that addresses are required for essential ECF purposes, and the Board has been pressing for them for some time. But, from what transpired at the meeting, communication looks to have been less than enthusiastic. Skip if you don't want the detail. The NCCU had said they would comply at once if ECF provided legal advice that their data protection fears were groundless. The Board did, in fact, procure such advice some time ago and told the NCCU they had done so, but failed to provide a copy. One had finally been provided at today's meeting. It's a pity if negotiations have been held up by things like this. (It is also said that meetings requested by the NCCU have not taken place. We have no details. But this, if true, cannot have speeded negotiations up either.)
The second proposal was voted on first. It was agreed, subject to the signing of an ECF-NCCU agreement resolving "all the issues". This is required by 31st May 2006 but is expected to happen at a meeting at the end of April. As for the first proposal, not everyone is agreed about providing NMS benefits for players not Members of the ECF. The meeting, perhaps wearied, moved to next business. (9) Extension of NMS to other areas. The Finance Director proposed amendments to the Direct Members and Game Fee Bye Laws permitting similar schemes to be set up outside the North. Norfolk CA are said to be interested. The Director's proposals were carried 15 - 12 on a show of hands and then lost 72 - 78 on a card vote. The votes must have taken as much time as the discussion, and your Webmaster cannot report reasons for either of them. (10) Constituent Unit representation at Council. The Board proposed amendments to the Articles to the effect that CUs should have one rep each like everyone else, with voting entitlement determined by Game Fee payment. There was some looseness in the wording, and it was referred to the Governance Committee. (11) Appointment of Auditor. Council appointed Cliff Chandler of Gravesend. (12) Counties Championship rules. The Home Director proposed that the regional stages should be run by "the five Chess Unions and the Chiltern League", with a provision that the Board should have power to extend the list. Well, we say he proposed it. His proposal was on the Agenda. But after discussion with Counties he declared himself no longer in favour of it. The other contributor was a Chiltern person who declared himself also not in favour. Rather than move to next business Council had a vote, and the Director voted against. We think it was nem pro. (13) A National Membership Scheme. Council was invited to note and discuss a paper from the Finance Director setting out the benefits of a national scheme. Discussion was rather brief. It was getting late and the meeting had not opted to continue until 6.30. One point made was that such a scheme would not be welcome if compulsory. (14) Venue for AGM (21.10.06 in WECU). No venue has been booked, but the Federation is currently looking at Swindon.
The meeting closed at 5.53 pm, having got through the Agenda with seven minutes to spare.
So was it a good meeting?
Well, it got through the Agenda with seven minutes to spare. We feared it wouldn't, because there was much repetition and some prolixity in the earlier items. Later items were rushed. Much time, also, was spent on things that one felt ought to have been resolved long ago. And still some of them are not, along with other important agenda issues. The tensions didn't help. So, no, it wasn't really.
This is, of course, your Webmaster's personal account. He will probably go on revising it for a few days yet, and will correct any mistakes or serious omissions that are brought to his attention.
rjh 24.4.06, amended 25.4.06, 27.4.06
ECF FINANCE COUNCIL MEETING
update 1.4.06
A second mailing of papers, received this morning, repairs a gap which we noted below. The Board proposes K Ilyumzhinov to fill the vacant post of Auditor. Mr Ilyumzhinov, it turns out, is not a British citizen but has qualifications gained in his own country which have amply satisfied the Board. He states that he has extensive experience of chess administration but feels the time may be ripe for him to move on to fresh challenges.
ECF FINANCE COUNCIL MEETING
22.4.06 at Luton
No, it hasn't happened yet. But the papers came yesterday, and here's a quick (and selective) rundown of what's on the Agenda. The numbering is ours, not the Agenda's. (1) ECF Grand Prix. The Home Director, after consultation, proposes that the Open section be ditched with effect from 2006-7. The Board's position is not stated. We think the Director's reasons are financial. Sections to be U175, U150, U125, U100 and Junior. First prize in each section (well, that's the way we read it) to be £200. Second prize (in each section, ditto) to be £50 off your entry fee to the British Championship. (2) Game Fee. The Board recommends that Game Fee go up from 44p to 45p from 1st September 2006. (3) Northern Membership Scheme. There is a rather technical resolution intended to facilitate the extension of the Scheme into 2006-7. There is also a resolution that Northern Members may opt out of ECF Membership and be "Registered Players" instead, but we think this is something totally boring connected with the fact that they haven't been filling their Membership application forms in. (4) Extension of the NMS to other areas. We think this is close to the heart of the Finance Director, because NMS has been financially successful. Proposals are on the Agenda to facilitate it. (5) Constituent Unit Representation at ECF Council. It is proposed that it come down to one Representative Member each. We never understood why they didn't propose this in October 2005, when they (successfully) proposed exactly the same thing for BCF Council meetings. (6) Appointment of Auditor. Oddly, the Agenda says exactly that. Nothing else, and we can only refer you to our Report of the October Council meeting. (7) Counties Championship Rules. The Home Director proposes, and the Board is silent, that the rules be amended so that the qualifying stages are conducted by the Unions and - the new bit - the Chiltern League. He further proposes that the Board be empowered to add other such approved "regional organisations" without reference to Council. The SCCU reps are mandated to oppose the first of these proposals, but you knew that if you've read the SCCU Executive Report 11.3.06. What they will make of the second, we can't say.
rjh 31.3.06
ECF BOARD: MEETING WITH UNIONS & LEAGUES
4.3.06
The Board held an informal meeting with the Unions and certain invited leagues during the 4NCL proceedings in Birmingham. Informal in the sense that no decisions were on the table, nor formal minutes taken. The intention was to communicate with people closer to the grass roots and take on board any concerns they might have. Board members spoke on their areas of activity, and questions and discussion followed.
Present (not always throughout the meeting) were five members of the Board and representatives from all the Unions plus the London, Birmingham and Manchester leagues. Invitations had gone to the leagues paying most Game Fee. This included the Bristol League and the 4NCL itself, though in fact neither was formally represented.
This is your Webmaster's account of the meeting. It does not pretend to be complete. He will be pleased to remedy any inadvertent omissions and, of course, errors. Just say. (1) Junior Chess. The Ampleforth (as was) Junior Masters has secured a new home, though its identity cannot be published yet. The Director has thoughts about the future of the ECF Schools Championship, but did not divulge them. He proposes to discuss them with the Chief Conductor shortly. Whether he will bring them to the Board before that he did not say. We understand the next Board meeting is Saturday 11th March. (2) Counties Championships. [If we have covered this at some length, it's because the matter is of current importance.] An unfortunate situation had arisen in the last few days. On 13th February the Home Director had promulgated a draw headed by a note inviting further nominations from the Unions. The published byes, by implication, were provisional. This was, perhaps unwisely, not explicitly stated and there was no indication of time limits. It is entirely your Webmaster's fault that he believed the byes, not noticing the implied reservation, when he copied the draw. The inevitable happened, and on 1st March - more than two weeks later - it was suddenly announced that two extra MCCU nominations had appeared, with the consequent disappearance of two SCCU byes. Some SCCU people had availed themselves of this meeting to complain about it.
Whether it was right to issue a provisional draw, spelt out or not and with or without time limit, was not really discussed. It was done, and in one case (Surrey's vanished draw in the Minor Counties) there seemed little to be done about it. In the other (Kent's in the Open) there was room for debate. It would equally have been possible to take the bye away from another MCCU team rather than a team from a different Union. Some thought this would have been fairer. It is presumably incidental that the pairing actually chosen was the rather unfortunate Kent v Gtr Manchester. This pairing has gone back to the Board, and we should know the answer on 11th March.
A bye remains in the U175. The Director, pressed since the meeting, has given an assurance that it is bullet-proof. Its time limit has expired. So has that of the remaining bye in the Open, though its destination is uncertain.
The Director is to revise the Counties Championships rules. (3) Chiltern League. The Home Director suggested allowing the Chiltern League to make nominations in the Counties Championships with effect from next year. This attracted little support. The rules say the qualifying competitions are Union-based, and there seemed no obvious reason to change. The Chiltern League could always apply for recognition as a Union if it wished. (4) Marketing. Roy Lawrence, Marketing Director, gave a presentation illustrating his activities since he took over last April and his ideas for the future. He had made many contacts and secured valuable publicity, was in constant touch with the press, and was talking to a number of potential sponsors. He presented a "Direct Member profile" derived from a survey undertaken some time ago. We're not sure what to make of the DMs' 0% readership of the Express (perhaps they just wouldn't admit it?) or 18% readership of the Guardian, or their average annual income of £19000 (seems low? - or were half the respondents juniors?). The response rate was 8% and we don't know what categories may have selected themselves out of the survey, but the picture came across of a rather middle-class membership.
The Director felt that the appearance of the ECF's products and stationery was old-fashioned and unco-ordinated, and part of his talk was devoted to a presentation of possible new logos and design of stationery. (5) Finance. The Finance Director said that, while we were never going to equal last year's bonanza, his projection for the year was a surplus of £5000 - £6000. There was a junior underspend and, not surprisingly, a saving of £1000 in (Management) Board costs. Game Fee was broadly holding up. (This is presumably after adjustment to take account of what's in the next paragraph.) Direct Membership income was down, partly as a result of the disappointing entry in the British Championships.
The big plus was Northern Membership. The break-even figure had been calculated as 1300 NMs, and we had currently about 1600. (They are still coming in, with local pockets of resistance in certain counties.) (6) ECF Membership. The Finance Director, encouraged by the Northern Membership outcome, was minded to try for a national scheme on the same lines. It might be a pure Membership scheme, or a Membership-Game-Fee hybrid. It will not be next year, because there are hurdles to overcome. Not all Unions will start from a climate favourable to Membership as the NCCU did, and not all will have a Bill O'Rourke on tap to promote and administer the scheme. There would be gift-aid advantages if the Federation achieved charitable status, but charitable status is not a foregone conclusion. (7) ECF Grand Prix. (See next Report down.) There are suggestions to chop the top off, after this season, and continue without the Open. But consultation is still in progress and nothing is decided. (8) Printed Grading List. The Home Director had budgeted on break-even sales of 300 this year, and fewer than 200 had been sold. The printed List is a service which can reasonably be allowed to make a loss, but the price would have to go up to maybe £20 next year. Some had suggested abolishing the printed List altogether, but this is not really an option until players and organisers evolve portable-computer extensions in convenient parts of their anatomy. Last year's sales, for what it's worth, were 600+. The reason for the decline is so obvious no one mentioned it. (9) Communications communications communications. The word was on everyone's lips, Board and non-Board alike. Your Webmaster has had a beef about it in another page, but he didn't raise it here. Someone else did, and no one disagreed. It is urgently necessary for the Board to find a way of telling everyone what it's doing. In principle it publishes accounts of its proceedings on the ECF website. It doesn't need to be - it shouldn't be - the minutes. But it hasn't happened. The CEO, whose job we understand it is, has been unwell. "So why doesn't he have a PA?", people said. Your Webmaster would be more general. All Board members are subject to malady. Often, surely, there will be tasks such as this which someone else could take over. This does not seem to have been thought about.
However. Everyone agreed about communication, and we are sure matters will improve. (10) Next meeting. This meeting had been called with 13 days' notice to the leagues and Unions. We've improved on that, at any rate. The next meeting in the series is on Saturday 9th September, at a venue not yet decided.
rjh 7.3.06
ECF GRAND PRIX
21.12.05
This year's Grand Prix concludes at the end of the British, and the future of the event is up for discussion. A questionnaire should be appearing before Christmas on the ECF website.
It's about money. To return to its former glory, the GP would need sponsorship of £20,000 a year. It has no sponsorship, and currently costs something over £5000. It will cost more next year if it is to continue. In addition, administration is time-consuming and the method of calculation might have to be simplified.
Anyway. Views are sought. Should the event continue, and in what form? If you would like to respond, please visit the ECF site and return the questionnaire.
BCF/ECF ANNUAL GENERAL MEETINGS
22nd October 2005
This is unfair to journalists. "BCF/ECF Holds Two Brief, Orderly and Good Humoured Council Meetings in Less than an Afternoon" may have something of the Man Bites Dog about it, but even so it lacks spice. Council met at CCPR ("one voice for sport and recreation") in London. Gerry Walsh was in the Chair, and 38 attended if we counted right. BCF AGM
(1.30 pm) came first. It was the last "real" AGM the BCF will have, though annual meetings will still be needed for essential formalities. Before proceedings began, the meeting stood in silence in memory of Steve Boniface. (1) Voting entitlements. Unusually there were a few queries about the voting register, from organisations who felt they had been wrongly omitted. If we understood correctly, they had paid their dues after the register was compiled and there was no room for flexibility. The organisations paying too little to qualify for a vote were, on this occasion, allowed one. This varies unpredictably from one meeting to another. (2) Northern Membership Scheme came up early when someone raised it under Matters Arising. No doubt it would have been reported on at some point in the meeting. But it turns out the agreement had eventually been signed at the morning's MB meeting after unconscionable (our word) delays. Copies are to be sent to Union Presidents for distribution, and it will go on the website as soon as possible. No details were announced at the meeting. Your Webmaster borrowed Bill O'Rourke's copy during the tea break, but wasn't sure he understood all the details (such as, what exactly a Northern Member's grading entitlements are). Some comments, maybe, when it's in the public domain and the details are clear.
The number of NMs is now well over 1000. (3) New BCF Constitution. The meeting adopted a revised simplified version. It then immediately amended it (yes, it was the next item on the Agenda) by changing the Constituent Units' representation at Council meetings to 1 each. (This is said not to affect the number of votes they get.) Oddly, there was no proposal to amend the ECF Articles in the same way. (4) Money. As always, people who understand money asked technical questions which your Webmaster understood more or less as well as he did the answers. He understood that the Surplus figure at the bottom of the 2004-5 Accounts was £13,718. (5) International Rating. There was some discussion, or explanation, of the new ECF rule requiring all players in a FIDE-rated event to be members of a national federation. Someone remarked that federations with low membership fees might become flags of convenience. (6) Strategic Plan. After nodding through (that seems to be ambiguous, but we'll let it stand) the 2004-5 Achievement Report, the BCF Council proceeded to approve the ECF's long-term Strategic Plan. It had "Draft for Approval by ECF Council" on the front in big letters, but had been placed on the BCF Agenda by mistake. No one seemed to mind doing it in the wrong meeting.
Not for the first time, there was a proposal that Strategic Planning material should be placed on the website for download rather than printed out and posted to Council reps. (Why just Strategic Planning? No doubt for the same reason as before: it was the Strategic Planning Director's baby.) It got nowhere. Someone said Council papers are too long, but we don't think he had Strategic Planning specially in mind.
ECF AGM
followed at 3.30 after a 45-minute break. (Yes, really, the BCF meeting took an hour and a quarter.) There wasn't really much in the ECF one except (1) Elections. The unopposed candidates for Directorships all got in, without even any votes against. For completeness: President Gerry Walsh; CEO Roy Heppinstall; Finance Robert Richmond; Home Chris Majer; Junior Cyril Johnson; International Rupert Jones; Marketing Roy Lawrence.
There were four candidates for the two non-executive Directorships. You could vote for up to two of them or None of the Above, and the (card) voting went: John Wickham 89; Mike Truran 87; Andrew Leadbetter 29; Brian Smith 28; None of the Above 0.
Other jobs: Finance Committee Chairman John Philpott as before; other members as before. Governance Committee (Constitution Committee as was) Chairman John Dunleavy as before; other members as before.
No Auditor was appointed. Geoff Steele is not legally qualified under the more stringent ECF requirements; quite apart from the fact that he had just agreed to do another job (see below) which would have ruled him out anyway. The Board was asked to look around and come back to Council with something at the April meeting. It appears that companies with an annual turnover of less than £5.5 million (we think it was) can have something called an Independent Examiner (we think it was) instead. The ECF's turnover is not thought likely to exceed this limit for a while.
A Secretary and various Managers had been appointed by the Board at its morning meeting. The Secretary is Geoff Steele. The Managers are: Women Claire Summerscale; Congress Chess David Welch; Coaching Matthew Turner; Grading & Rating Dave Thomas.
Other items: (2) Amendments to Bye Laws. Council made two minor amendments, bringing the Bye Laws into line with existing practice. (3) ECF Library. It was noted that the library was to go back into (temporary, one hopes) storage. But you already knew. The current arrangements have not worked out well. (4) Council meetings 2006. Finance meeting Saturday 22nd April in East Anglia; AGM Saturday 21st October in WECU. The BCF AGM will, until BCF decides otherwise, always be held on the same date and in the same place as the ECF one. This was (correctly) a decision of the BCF meeting, though we report it here.
The ECF meeting concluded at 4.29 pm, making it even shorter than the BCF one.
rjh 24.10.05
BCF MANAGEMENT BOARD MEETING
17th September 2005
The Management Board met on Saturday 17th September in Birmingham with CEO Roy Heppinstall in the Chair. Seventeen attended and as usual I have tried to concentrate on matters of interest to grass-roots chess players. Unsurprisingly, though, much of the Agenda and discussion was taken up with the arrangements for the pending change of name to English Chess Federation, coupled with conversion to a Company Limited by Guarantee, to be finalised at the October meeting of Council. (1) BCF Library. It was reported that the Library had been returned to the Office (from the University of Kent) as a temporary measure and that a more permanent storage space was being sought. Ideas as to a suitable venue were being sought. (2) CRB. The number of requests for CRB clearance was growing and additional Counter-signatories were being sought, especially in the West of England and the Midlands. (3) Insurance. The Club and Congress Insurance Scheme was now up and running again, with personnel from the Office now suitably trained to FSA requirements. (4) Manager of Grading. It was agreed that in view of the reduced number of Directors in the ECA an additional managerial post would be created entitled Manager of Grading and Rating. (5) Money. The Accounts for 2004/05 showed a vastly improved position compared with earlier years and the surplus would result in the General Reserve increasing to over £21K.
The loss on the British Championships in the IOM was much less than had been feared, and although final figures were awaited the loss was unlikely to exceed £1500. Arrangements for future Championships in Swansea (2006) and Great Yarmouth (2007) were going ahead. (6) Role of Match Captains. It was reported that the Arbiters’ Association had given their views on FIDE recommendations regarding the Role of Match Captains in Team Events, saying that essentially such positions were of an administrative nature only. (7) FIDE rated events. It was said that England had fewer FIDE rated events compared with other countries and the Board agreed to review the finances involved so as to encourage such events. (8) Residential Qualifications. A set of “protocols” was agreed to govern the residential qualifications of players and clubs where changes to County boundaries etc. had caused problems. Basically the principle to be applied was that any player qualified by birth or long term residency would have the option of playing for either County, should the boundaries change. These would be put to the April meeting of Council for formal approval. (9) FIDE rating. It was agreed to implement the long standing (FIDE) rule that players had to be members of their National Federation in order to receive a FIDE Rating. This would be done by requiring events to enforce membership on players wishing to enter, and declining to rate events that did not agree to this policy.
[rjh: - I thought the BCF already was implementing the long standing rule. By simply withholding the results of players who were not members of national Federations. It has been BCF policy for long enough, and Council has been told at least once (June 2004) that it was being applied. But I asked someone who knows, and it turns out the policy has been implemented only in the 4NCL, and only for the last year at that. Elsewhere results have gone on being sent for everyone, qualified or not. I'm amazed.
FIDE's methods have changed anyway now, and the 4NCL's edited extracts will no longer be possible. It has to be the whole event or nothing. Hence the MB decision. Perhaps this one will be implemented.] (10) ECF Communications. With a new slimmed-down Board the need for effective communication with the grass roots was recognised, and there would be a series of informal meetings between members of the Board and other interested parties (Unions, Counties, Leagues etc) on a regular basis. (11) Affiliations. The following were agreed. Congresses: Bourne End, Central London Rapidplay, Cotswold, Hayes Spring Congress, South of England (closed) Junior Championships, and UK Chess International. Leagues: Coventry and District Chess League.
[rjh: - Funny. I thought most of those had been affiliated for years.] (12) NCCU Membership Scheme. There had been some delay in finalising the Memorandum of Agreement with the NCCU to enable implementation of the Scheme, and a number of decisions were taken which it was hoped would enable progress to be made.
David Smith
SCCU Representative
1st October 2005