ECF NEWS

ECF Grading Back to SCCU home page

updated 9.5.09
ECF NEWS
ECF FINANCE COUNCIL MEETING
18.4.09 in Birmingham
was chaired, in the President's absence, by Chris Majer. We think 35 attended and 60 apologised for absence. How many hats the 35 wore, out of 170-odd in the Council cupboard, we don't know. Biggest proxy-holder with 11 (out of 44) was the same NCCU person as last time. They must have something against Council meetings up north.
(1) Finance Director. It was announced that Michael JR White of Bristol would be taking over as Finance Director from the end of the meeting.
(2) Role of the President. Following the President's announcement that he would not be standing next time, the Board wondered if Council might wish to revise the existing division of responsibilities between President and CEO. (There have been noises in the NCCU for some time to the effect that the President should be a figurehead.) It wasn't on the agenda, and it didn't go beyond a straw poll, but the "proposal" eventually crystallised as: CEO roughly as at present; plus a non-executive Chairman ("you'd have to be careful how you divided their responsibilities"); plus maybe, and in the fullness of time, a figurehead President ("those aren't easy to come by"). Council supported this by 14 (straw) votes to 7. It's not very clear to your Webmaster how elections along these lines could sensibly be held in October without holding an Extraordinary General Meeting first.
(3) Sets for Schools. Chris Majer and David Anderton had had a meeting on Tuesday, their second we believe, with the new Executive Chairman of Holloid. We won't report everything they told Council, in view of Holloid's wish to handle publicity themselves (a press release* is expected). But plans have moved on since the January statement. There is new thinking on distribution (which now targets the 2009-10 school year as you'd expect).
     Why should we believe anything will come of this now, after the premature announcements and disappointments and silences of the last year and more? One reason must be that the new Holloid boss, when he took over late last year, did not wash his hands of the project as he presumably might have done. On the contrary he seems to have embraced it with enthusiasm. Another reason is the impression he has made on Chris Majer. Chris spoke convincingly of his confidence that Holloid will deliver, and has put his reputation on the line. He will not stand for office in October if they do not deliver.
     The ECF has things to deliver as well. It was remarked that we needed that tenth Director.
(4) Business Plan. We don't usually waste many words on Business Plans, and it's three years since one appeared in full at a Council meeting. This time, however, we again had a full Plan in front of us. Andrew Farthing, the new Strategic Planning Officer, addressed the meeting. He has sought to make the plan more dynamic, in consultation with Directors and other officers, by encouraging the introduction of new initiatives. One aim - not presented as new, but we didn't know about it before - was "to seek to establish a requirement for a minimum of one female player per team in County competition and other events, if agreed". We did once have a woman-count tie-break after all. The aim was promptly not agreed, and was amended.
     That one was too easy, but seeking new ideas can't be wrong. Andrew Farthing has also written to all the Constituent Units inviting input, and has set up a thread on the EC Forum at http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=761.
(5) Accounts. We won't wallow in the Accounts - well, the 2009-10 budget is in balance - but we'll mention a few things. Remember we're a financial innocent.
     British Championship Congress 2008. How did we manage to overspend by £8000? "Through not having things in writing" seems to have been a large part of it, and we have no idea whose fault it was. Torquay 2009 should more or less break even. Note 26.4.09. Stewart Reuben today in the EC Forum http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=748&start=45 is more explicit about what went wrong at Liverpool.
     Game Fee 2008-9. League Game Fee receipts are below expectation this year. At the moment it's hard to tell whether this reflects playing activity, because the fee comes in half way through the season and results are not reported till May or June. "How rigorously does the ECF check that Game Fee paid reflects games graded?" Finance Director: "I've done careful checks a couple of times, and the match looks reasonable." We needn't add that exact checks would cost more in time and effort than they were worth.
     Management Services. Someone proposed that Management Services (net forecast expenditure £108,600; budgeted next year £110,000) should aim to save £5000 on the budget figure. Lost by 5 votes to 17. We won't mention trees and postage and Council meetings.
     Permanent Invested Fund. A year ago, Council (effectively) asked the Directors of Chess Centre Ltd to transfer the Centre's assets to the Permanent Invested Fund. The exact resolution is in the minutes of the Finance Meeting 26.4.08. Someone said, "Has this been done?" No. A Director of Chess Centre Ltd (all right, Alan Martin, who abstained a year ago) thought it unwise - we don't know what his co-Director thought - and it didn't happen. At this point your Webmaster's innocence becomes painful. Are Directors of Chess Centre Ltd answerable to the Board of the ECF? Council appeared to think so, and accepted an assurance from the CEO that the Board would either satisfy Council's wishes of a year ago, or come back to Council with a reason why it hadn't.
(6) Direct Member Subscriptions other than Basic have not increased since 2004. New rates 2009-10:

	old	new	3-yr old	3-yr new
Standard	£16	£20	£40	£50
Junior	£13	£16
Full	£46	£52	£115	£130
Family	£52	£58	£130	£145
Vice President	£100	£100	£250	£250
Basic	£10.50	£11
Basic Junior	£6.50	£7

You may recall, from our preview of the meeting, that the Board proposed 50p increases all round. And so it did, if you believed the Agenda. Council decided to vote on the recommendations in the Finance Director's Budget Report instead. Luckily the postal voters weren't called on.
(7) Minimum Fee for Member Organisations was increased from £50 to £52. The Board had proposed no change.
(8) Game Fee. The Board recommended 50p (an increase of 2p). On the traditional card vote the figures were
     75p            2
     60p            6
     52p            2
     51p            6
     50p         100
     48p           51
     47p            2
     10p            2
Game Fee from 1st September 2009 is thus 50p. The reduced rates were not voted on so follow the usual rule.
(9) Grading Bands 2009-10. It is no secret that junior New Grades have been giving cause for concern, and someone asked for an update. Howard Grist said that Standardplay, after adjustments, is no longer a problem. Junior Rapidplay grades will still not behave, for reasons that aren't clear yet. Dave Thomas added that mostly the problem lies with the Under 11s. It might prove necessary to publish U11 Rapidplay grades separately.
     As far as Standardplay was concerned, corrections to juniors' grades would have only minimal effect on the adult grades currently published, and not much on the overall distribution. There was thus no reason why Council could not proceed with the grading-band proposals that were before it. So it did, and it approved the SCCU proposals, viz -
    Open
    U180
    U160
    U140
    U120
plus a new competition:
    U100
There was some feeling that the changes to the existing bands were good for the SCCU and bad for everyone else. Why isn't clear to us, since they more or less follow the grading revisions, so effectively represent "no change". Anyway. They were supported by 16 votes to 11 on a show of hands, then by 107 to 65 on a card vote. The proposal for an extra competition (the equivalent of the SCCU's U75, which is new this year) was then carried heavily, though with 1 vote against (why?). Obviously it won't occur unless it gets at least one non-SCCU entrant.
     The Minor Counties continues untouched. Which, of course, does mean change. Its "U180 average" limit will now exclude more of the stronger County first teams. Under Old Grades it excluded only the very strongest.

The meeting closed at 5.50 pm. We ought to say, for completeness, that there was a blink-and-you-miss-it BCF meeting after the tea break which approved Accounts. Your Webmaster, returning a few seconds late from the tea break, didn't notice it was a BCF meeting till they told him.
rjh 25.4.09, revised 26.4.09. Please tell us of errors and omissions.

* The press release appeared on the ECF website 7.5.09. We believe it has gone to all the schools that put their names down for sets last year.

ECF FINANCE COUNCIL MEETING
18.4.09
The papers came yesterday. They are largely Money as you'd expect. One or five things -
(1) ECF's financial position "will not be the happiest reading": Robert Richmond. The projected deficit for 2008-9 is £15,000 (budget £3000). Projected Balances (readers will know what this means) at £32,000 are well below the £50,000 minimum. So:
(2) Game Fee is recommended to rise from 48p to 50p (might have been worse); and the Board proposes that Direct Members' subscriptions rise by 50p. All Direct Members, since it doesn't say otherwise.
(3) Acting Finance Director Robert Richmond announces that he will resign at the end of the meeting. He is prepared to carry on as temporary Finance Manager, if so requested, until the AGM.
(4) ECF President Gerry Walsh announces that he will not offer himself for re-election at the AGM.
(5) Grading bands for next year's County matches are on the agenda, but you knew that. See the SCCU page 6.3.09 if you didn't.
rjh 27.3.09

ECF YEARBOOK 2009
Ours came today, so let's review it. We'll be briefer than we were going to be.
     The Yearbook is much what it always was, but it's bigger than last year. At 144 pages (124 last year) it's actually fatter than any issue since the format reverted to large-page in 1997. Most of the increase is accounted for by an enlarged Results section. All right, there is an event report that appears in two places 44 pages apart. Careless, that. Another niggle: the photos too often lack captions, so you can't tell who those junior winners are. But even so, you're getting more information this year than, most likely, at any time in the last dozen years.
     Why should you buy the Yearbook? For one thing, a printed book is more reliably permanent than a website. For another, the Yearbook lists Champions and award winners back to the year dot. This would be perfectly doable on the website but seems not to have been done, or it's well hidden if it has. And then the Yearbook lists clubs whether they've got a website or not, and gives contact details for all of them. Many of the contact details will be out of date, but at least they're a starting point.
rjh 10.2.09
ECF Official Chess Yearbook 2009: obtainable from the ECF Office @ £14.80 including post & packing. (Standard & Junior members £12.80, Full Members £1.80)

ECF BOARD MEETING
10.1.09 in Birmingham
The Meeting was held at the Ibis Hotel Birmingham, which was shrouded in fog. The following were present for all or part of the Meeting: Board Members: Chris Majer (Chief Executive), Robert Richmond (Finance Director pro tem), Stewart Reuben (International Director), Cyril Johnson (Director of Home Chess), Peter Wilson (Marketing Director), John Wickham (Non-Executive Director, Alan Martin (Non-Executive Director). Observers: George Horne (NCCU), David Sedgwick (SCCU), Brian Smith (London League), Matthew Pollard (Manchester). John Wickham and Cyril Johnson were also representing the EACU and the MCCU respectively. Other Invitees: Andrew Farthing (Strategic Planning Officer), Manuel Weeks (Prospective Manager of the British Championships), Bruce Holland (Recipient of ECF President’s Award). During the Meeting, Chris Majer kindly allowed the observers (and me in particular) to contribute to the discussions.
     At the start of the Meeting we discovered that we were locked in the meeting room. After a short delay whilst the hotel staff freed us, the Meeting commenced.
(1) Apologies for absence from Gerry Walsh (President), Peter Purland (Director of Junior Chess), John Philpott (Chairman of the Governance Committee) and Mike Adams (Chairman of the Finance Committee).
(2) Award. The President’s Award was presented to Bruce Holland. Chris Majer outlined Bruce’s work for Kenilworth CC, the Leamington League, Warwickshire and the MCCU, and at ECF level in the fields of Grading and IT.
(3) Board Report. It was noted that Chris Majer had not yet published a note on the Board Meeting of 17th December. He would do so shortly together with a note on the present Meeting.
(4) FIDE Issues. The Board had been seeking undertakings from FIDE that changes being made to the FIDE Statutes would not retrospectively affect the status of England, Scotland, Wales, etc, as separate members. Assurances had been obtained from FIDE Officials, but these had not been written into the Statutes as Stewart Reuben had hoped.
     On the matter of default times it would be necessary to await the final version of the 2009 Laws before considering the matter further.
(5) Chess For Schools. Following the meeting with Holloid on 15th December and the Board Meeting on 17th December, Chris Majer had been discussing with Holloid the terms of a proposed Joint Statement. He recognised the need now to issue a Statement and proposed to do so on Monday 12th January. (On the basis of this assurance, I agreed to defer publication of this report until then. Chris subsequently explained to me in confidence why the Statement had been delayed. Whilst I fully understood his reasons, I did not feel that I should further postpone the release of this report.)
     Holloid had invested a substantial amount of money in the project and had produced 500 sets and boards. They were unable to proceed with volume manufacture unless sponsorship was obtained. Chris had a meeting about possible sponsorship in ten days’ time. If this did not bear fruit the Board would have to face the situation that they had 500 free sets, not 250,000.
     In addition to pursuing the sponsorship possibility, the Board resolved to issue a tender for the purchase of additional sets and boards from elsewhere. The cheapest quotation of which the Board were currently aware was from a Chinese supplier, who could provide them for £2.90 each for a minimum order of 10,000. Distribution within the UK would have to be financed or otherwise arranged. The Board considered the possibility of asking the Trustees of the John Robinson Trust to authorise the expenditure of say £100,000 on the purchase of sets, but decided not to pursue this possibility.
     A draw would be conducted to determine the recipients of the 500 sets, probably with one or more areas being selected (rather than individual schools) in order to ease the distribution problems. Other schools would be informed of the lowest price at which sets could be obtained from the ECF and invited to place orders.
     A debriefing meeting had been held with Charles W Wood, but he had not been asked to hand over the list of representatives nominated by the counties to help with the project. The list would now be obtained and the representatives contacted to see if they could help with the distribution of any orders.
     The support package for the schools was reviewed and the Board felt that this could be sold as a stand alone product. 2,000 DVDs were in stock. Two books, one by Andrew Martin and one by Richard James, were nearing completion, but the contractual arrangements with the authors had still to be finalised. John Upham was under contract to produce the online Certificate of Merit Scheme and was scheduled to deliver an initial version during the next couple of months. The best time to market the package was likely to be in the run up to the new academic year.
     To date there had been little progress with the establishment of Academies.
     The Board decided in principle to set up a “Chess for Schools Project Team” to be headed by a new Director of Chess for Schools. However, the vacancy for the latter position would not be advertised immediately. It was likely that there would be some complaints and adverse criticism following the announcement that there would not be 250,000 free sets and it would be better to wait a few weeks to allow matters to settle.
(6) Vacancies. Andrew Farthing had been appointed as the Strategic Planning Officer. Manuel Weeks was appointed as the Manager of the British Championships. No-one had yet been found to take over as Finance Director, and the Unions were asked to try and help to identify possible candidates. There had not been any applications for Manager of Congress Chess or for Manager of IT.
     The following were appointed to fill vacancies as Direct Members’ Representatives on Council: Life Vice Presidents etc. – Cyril Johnson; Basic Members – Sean Hewitt and Julie Johnson.
(7) Ethics Committee? The Board considered the possible establishment of an Ethics Committee to deal with cases of misconduct. It was decided not to pursue the idea and that such issues would remain within the remit of the Board.
(8) Information Commission Complaint. A parent had complained about the publication on the ECF website of a photograph of children submitted by the organiser of an event (not an ECF event). This had appeared alongside the list of prize winners. It would appear that the necessary permission had not in this instance been obtained.
     The material in question had been removed, but unfortunately it had been overlooked that the photograph in question had also appeared in ChessMoves and this initially remained available online on the site. Upon discovering this, the parent had complained to the Information Commission. The relevant material had now been removed from the online archive and Congress Organisers would be sent a circular stressing the need to be rigorous in obtaining permission for the publication of photographs of children. Provided that ECF procedures were tightened in this way the Information Commission would be unlikely to take further action.
(9) Strategic Planning. Andrew Farthing, the new Strategic Planning Officer, would be responsible for the production of the Annual Business Plan, the Annual Achievement Report, and the Long Term Strategic Plan. He felt that the current Strategic Plan did not really set out a clear long term vision for the ECF and he would be talking to current and former Directors about what they felt the ECF would be seeking to achieve.
(10) Financial Issues. The BCF Youth Trust had received a legacy of £10k.
     Robert Richmond estimated that the ECF would have reserves of about £50K at the financial year end (about £30K in the Legacies Fund and about £20K in General Reserves). This level of reserves was about the minimum he considered acceptable. He was likely to recommend that Game Fee be increased by “a multiple of 2p”, with his minimum figures being 2p on Game Fee (from 48p to 50p), 50p on basic Membership (from £10.50 to £11) and £2 on basic membership (from £16 to £18). No increases were envisaged in the entry fees for the Counties Championships as these had been increased significantly for 2007-08.
     Fees for FIDE Rated events would need to rise by about 30-40% because of the decline in the pound against the euro. Exact figures would be announced in April and would take effect from 1st July.
     An issue which has arisen in connection with the NCCU Membership Scheme remained under discussion. The matter would need to be clarified in a future written agreement.
     There was some discussion as to whether the Diary and the Yearbook were still necessary or cost effective and this would be reviewed.
(11) International Matters. The eligibility criteria for participating in the British Championships were considered. At present any player who had been resident in the British Isles for a year, even if the player remained affiliated to a foreign Federation. Some top English players had suggested that only players with a FIDE affiliation to a Federation within the British Isles should be eligible. The Board agreed to take further soundings amongst leading English players and amongst the other members of the British Isles Coordinating Committee. It was noted that the formal agreement of all eight members of the BICC would be necessary before any amendments could be made and for this reason any changes would not come into effect before 2010.
     There had been some controversy regarding one of the players who had represented England in the recent Olympiad. The player had a FIDE affiliation to England, but was not a British national and was neither born nor currently resident in England. A member of the Board suggested that the selection of this player had breached FIDE Regulations and this would be checked. However, the Board did not wish to alter the present policy provided that it was found to accord with the Regulations.
     There was some discussion about the International budget for 2009-10 and a request for financial assistance from the Hastings Congress. The Board was concerned about the ongoing financial viability of Hastings and would only consider granting support if satisfied that it was not going to become a regular commitment.
(12) Endorsement. The Board agreed that the ECF would endorse a new game called Retsami.
(13) The next Meeting would be held on Saturday 7th March.

Outside the Meeting Cyril Johnson kindly answered a couple of questions which I had submitted regarding the Counties Championships:

Q. Has the Draw for the National Stages been made and when will it be published?
A. The draw has been made. It will be sent to Union Controllers in a day or two and published shortly thereafter. (The draw was duly sent to Union Controllers on Monday 13th January.)
Q. Have you had any further thoughts since the October Council Meeting as to the grading limits which would be appropriate for the Counties Championships in 2009-10 and subsequently?
A. Cyril will be submitting a motion to the April Council Meeting that the grading limits should remain unchanged (in nominal terms). It will be open to Council to amend the motion and the Unions are of course at liberty to submit motions of their own to Council.

David Sedgwick 13.1.09

ECF GRADING MEETING
18.10.08 in Birmingham
We report this meeting in sorrow, we think. Not anger. It was duly called for the morning of the October Council meeting, starting at 11 am, and four people came. They represented Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Lincolnshire and the WECU, and they barely outnumbered the three Experts on the top table. We say "experts" though your Webmaster was one of them. All things are relative.
     On second thoughts we will not report the meeting now. Grading came up again in the afternoon, as how would it not, and we will report it there. We have other things to report from the afternoon session, one of them outrageous, but you will excuse us if we go to bed first.
rjh 19.10.08

ECF COUNCIL MEETING
18.10.08 in Birmingham
Waking this afternoon refreshed we found that the outrageous item was known to the English Chess Forum, and had been since a few minutes after its occurrence. Go there. We are working on our Report.
rjh 19.10.08

ECF COUNCIL MEETING
18.10.08 in Birmingham
(We don't suppose this will be the Report's final version, but it is at least finished.)
Gerry Walsh was in the Chair, and 32 attended if we counted right. An NCCU person held 12 proxies, comfortably ahead of the runner-up with 5.
(1) Matter Arising from the April Council meeting. Just for the record - you had probably guessed - it was announced that the Board is not currently pursuing the Membership plan that Council rejected. But it remains a long-term goal.
(2) Chess for Schools They called this a Matter Arising as well, from the July meeting. Production of sets and boards still waits on a repair to one tool, we think, and delivery of a second; and the operation will now take more than a year. Holloid Plastics remain firmly committed to the project, and their Managing Director - we hope we have the title correct - has put quite a lot of his own money into it.
     Distribution still is not fully sorted. The long-distance haulier, Fortec, is still in place. Target-end distribution is not obviously more sorted than it was after the July meeting. It has gone backwards, if one account we heard at the time was right. The Board spoke of a local authority that had agreed to arrange and fund distribution, and of two MPs who were being similarly helpful, and "I'm fairly sure that would be repeated across the country if needed". Yes, it is vague. No, there are no signed contracts with anyone.
     The original intention had been to deliver boxed sets. This may not be possible after all; instead, schools may get a big bag containing ten white kings, ten black kings... and 80 black pawns, and it would be their job to sort them out. We know schools that do this every week.
     We're not sure how the next bit arose at this point, but it turned out to be germane. Someone asked what sort of entry there was for this year's National (now Yateley Manor) Schools Championship. The organiser, about to shut up shop on entries, said it would be 160-odd, effectively about 40 more than last year (and 70 more than the year before). Entry forms had been emailed to nearly 8000 schools that had responded to the Chess for Schools initiative. Some will have fallen into spam traps, and many will have gone to schools that as yet have no equipment; but a lot of new schools have entered. It's a modest beginning, but the operation has borne fruit. (Wait till next year when they've all got their ten sets and boards.)
     The other thing came much further down the agenda. The Board proposed the amendment to Article 43 which we mentioned in the Preview below. It was carried by the required majority. The Board said it proposed to create a new Directorate of Chess for Schools (we don't know, at this time of night, whether that is the correct title) and was minded to appoint Andrew D Martin to it. Council expressed no objection, and we understand that the Board made its intended appointment when it met after the Council meeting closed.
(3) English Chess Forum. This is the "outrageous" item. It was not actually on the printed agenda; it came up under President's Report. It was reported that Holloid had been less than amused by certain postings on the Forum. Also (and it's a thing you can never seek evidence for) that the Forum had cost us potential sponsors. It was said, moreover, that defamation could be an issue. We know now, but did not then, that the Board at its morning meeting had considered severing all connections with the Forum there and then; but had decided, since Council was expected along any time, to put it to Council instead. It was proposed that the Forum link on the ECF (no, Federation) front page be removed, and the Forum be asked to stop using the bcfservices domain name. This proposal was carried by a large majority. (Only two voted against, and if you've been to the Forum any time in the last three days you will know who they were.)
     To call this decision "outrageous" was a bit over the top, on reflection; but we thought and think that it was wrong. ("We", as usual, means your Webmaster. The SCCU's opinion is not known to us.) We won't go into our reasons, but they are not quite the ones that have been attributed to us on the Forum.
     The Link on the ECF's front page disappeared promptly on Monday morning. By this time there was one in our own Links page. The Forum is still around, currently hyperactive, in its brand new domain http://www.ecforum.org.uk.
(4) Chess as a Charity. Some draft Articles (etc) have been prepared with a charitable ECF in mind, and a meeting with the Charity Commissioners is expected shortly. As an aside, Chess as a Sport is not quite a dead letter. But it is suspected that Sport England has other calls on its cash at the moment.
(5) Grading. We were going to start with the morning's meeting because it came first, but have decided to save its best questions till last. There was little overlap. The answers mostly came from Grading Manager Dave Thomas, and Howard Grist who wrote and maintains the grading program and was largely responsible for the detail of the New-Grade calculations.
• How far have you rolled the clock back? When were the grades last equal to this year's New ones? - Our analysis doesn't tell us that.
• It feels like Christmas, all these extra grading points. (No reply noted.)
• Negative (or "zero") grades should be eliminated. How about adding (say) 200 points to everyone's grade? - President: OK, the Board will consider it.
• Or how about doing the sums in ECF, then converting to Elo? - It's what they do in Wales, but it isn't a recommendation of the grading team.
• How will this impact on Chess for Schools? - Probably not at all. The Board is considering a simpler and completely separate scheme for the schools, directly related to game points rather than grading performance.
• Will the new system be monitored? - Yes, but not annually. Every few years.
• Will the ECF change the grading bands in the Counties Championships? - We will bring proposals to the April Council meeting.
• Why are the Junior "conversions" different from the Adult ones? - Because the Juniors were undergraded.
• Aren't some of the Junior New Grades ridiculously high? - Errm. There has been some overcompensation. We'll have another look at it. It is possible the 2008 Junior New Grades will be revised. [Council never heard this. It was said at the morning meeting.]
• Are you happy with the job? Yes, apart from the preceding item.
(6) Money. Discussion of the Accounts was pleasingly brief. The deficit for 2007-8, reported in draft as £14,000-odd, had been revised to £7437. Apparently a Game Fee debtor owing £6630 had been overlooked. (How on earth do you run up a Game Fee debt of £6630?) The new figure is better than the April forecast, which in turn was better than the budgeted £12,000. We think.
     Perhaps we should say now, though it came up under International Director's Report, that someone asked about the heavy International expenditure. Well, one expects it to be heavy. But it was remarked that we now have £10,000 of LV= sponsorship which has enabled us to secure the strongest teams for this year's Olympiad.
(7) Counties Championships (part 1). Not for the first time a Chiltern person asked why the Chiltern League cannot nominate qualifiers for the National stage. Not for the first time it was explained that they can't because the rules say they can't, and that they are perfectly entitled to propose changing the rules but never have.
(8) Grand Prix. Stewart Reuben's "proposal" (see the Council Preview below) could not be considered because it was not on the agenda. It was said that the existing sponsors would like the GP to continue. It was agreed that the proposal, if made, ought to go to Council rather than the Board. There would still be time to take it at the April meeting.
__________

IT WAS NOW 3.34 pm
by the slower of the wall clocks, the one set to Brummagem time, and the meeting adjourned for tea. In this intermission a BCF Council meeting was held, which we will report below. The ECF meeting then resumed at 3.57 pm on the same clock.
__________

(9) Elections. The uncontested elections went as you would expect. The odd vote or four against, and everyone got in. There was, of course, a contested election. Stewart Reuben and Peter Wilson both stood for International Director. It was a card vote. Someone said, "Will we be told the voting figures?" Chairman: "That is up to the tellers." The tellers told but wouldn't tell, so we have no figures to offer you. But Stewart won. Later: a teller tells us he was not consulted about the reporting of the voting figures, so perhaps the decision was the Chairman's after all. But Stewart won.
     There was also a Directorate with no candidates. Finance. The Board will advertise. In the meantime, we understand Robert Richmond has agreed to continue on an acting basis.
(10) Counties Championships (part 2). This is item 2 from the Preview below. The SCCU Executive 3rd October (see SCCU page) had decided it would not support the erosion, deliberate or not, of the Unions' autonomy in the Union stage. The Home Director had now changed his mind on this point, and the new Rules so amended were adopted without SCCU (or, indeed, any) opposition.
     Note 28.10.08. The new rules now appear on the ECF website, but there is an error. The amendment appears incorrectly. What the SCCU had objected to was that "Sections A, B and C" (look them up) were to apply to the Union stage; whereas previously - in effect - only Sections A and B had done so. The Director agreed to amend it to "A and B" and told the meeting of this amendment, clearly, before the vote took place. Council then approved the draft as amended. In the website version the "Sections A, B and C" rule has simply disappeared, leaving the Unions free to do what they like. The Unions are unlikely to complain, but Council makes the rules and this isn't what Council said.
     The Home Director has been made aware of this error and we are sure it will be corrected in due course.
(11) Meetings 2009. Finance: Saturday 18th April in Birmingham; AGM(s) Saturday 17th October in London
(12) Other Business. "Please can the top table have microphones next time so we can hear them?" We think this was agreed, but there was a sort of packing-up atmosphere at the time.

The meeting closed at 5.42 pm BST. We must now remember the

BCF COUNCIL MEETING
which interposed itself. It lasted 7 minutes and did little, in truth, beyond approving minutes and noting accounts. It might also have approved some accounts if the BCF ones themselves had been available. These will require a BCF meeting all to themselves, tacked on to the April ECF meeting.
     Someone asked how the BCF's investments were affected by the current financial situation, and the answer was that in the long term we were as well placed as anyone. We hope we have this right.

rjh 22.10.08, amended 28.10.08

ECF COUNCIL MEETING
18.10.08 in Birmingham
No, this is a Preview. The papers came yesterday. There's the odd thing or three you might want to know about.
(1) The Board proposes an amendment to Article 43, to the effect that the Board shall consist of a maximum of ten members rather than the current nine. (It is a "Special Resolution", by the way, and requires a 75% majority.) Why the extra place? Because the Board feels there should be a Director solely responsible for the Chess for Schools project (and does not feel able to dispense with any of the other existing Directorships). There is obviously not as yet a candidate for the projected post. The Board would appoint.
     One question occurs to us. According to the papers of the BCF Council meeting 23.4.05 which set the whole thing up, "Preliminary soundings... carried out by Melville Rodrigues have established that we could not expect on any basis to secure charitable status with a Board of 20 or so and the recommended figure is under 10." Perhaps things have changed, but we're a bit surprised to see no mention of the point now.
(2) The Director of Home Chess proposes a new set of County Match Rules. "The County Rules as they stand have grown out of situations." (Pardon?) Anyway, the draft represents a large-scale re-arrangement of the Rules which certainly makes them easier to read. Changes of substance? The most significant is that every Union has the right to nominate a minimum of two teams in any competition, not just the Minor; and three if the number of entries is five or more (currently seven or more). But see next paragraph. Oh, and any County is Minor which has not qualified to play in the current season's Open. The intention would be to bring in the new Rules for the start of this season's National stage.
     We have reservations about the drafting, but that was to be expected. One odd thing is that an old deleted phrase appears to have found its way back in by accident. There was a time when your three nominations, for seven or more entrants, were conditional on their completing all of their Union-stage fixtures without defaulting a match. This requirement was dropped by Council in 2003, but it has reappeared with the change to five teams. It is certainly in the "current" (seven-team) version on the ECF website. That, however, is a simple error. Well, we can accept it back or throw it out again.
    Postscript. It has been suggested to us that the draft may considerably reduce the Unions' right to do their own thing in the Union stages. We're looking at it.  -  Next day: we have, and it's true. Perhaps things will be said.
(3) Stewart Reuben's report to Council as ECF Congress Manager includes the following.
     "Proposal. That the English Grand Prix be discontinued at the end of the current season, which will be 31 May 2009, unless substantial sponsorship is found."
     This proposal is not to be found in the Agenda.

When will the ECF drop the idiotic practice of sending Council papers in hard copy to every single rep without even asking if they'd like it by email? What is the cost, per meeting, in printing and postage and envelopes and Office time?
rjh 27.9.08, amended 28.9.08

Earlier material is in the Archive.