English Chess Forum

John Upham wrote:Can anyone update us on the decision of the board in this matter : the meeting was on June 18th 2010?

There were other matters discussed that I would like to know the outcome of.

What was on the agenda?

Alex Holowczak wrote:

John Upham wrote:Can anyone update us on the decision of the board in this matter : the meeting was on June 18th 2010?

There were other matters discussed that I would like to know the outcome of.

I'm sure the minutes will be published in due course.

What makes you think that? Board Minutes have never been published up to now.

Moreover, we no longer even seem to get summaries on the ECF website. At one time these used to appear reasonably promptly, but to date there have been none for any Board Meetings since November 2009.

David Sedgwick wrote:

Alex Holowczak wrote:

John Upham wrote:Can anyone update us on the decision of the board in this matter : the meeting was on June 18th 2010?

There were other matters discussed that I would like to know the outcome of.

I'm sure the minutes will be published in due course.

What makes you think that? Board Minutes have never been published up to now.

Moreover, we no longer even seem to get summaries on the ECF website. At one time these used to appear reasonably promptly, but to date there have been none for any Board Meetings since November 2009.

Well, the summaries were what I was referring to... Hadn't noticed they hadn't been there, to be honest.

Alex Holowczak wrote:Well, the summaries were what I was referring to... Hadn't noticed they hadn't been there, to be honest.

They probably don't wish them discussed "on here" as we are perhaps the only people who would look

Go on then, ask me some specific questions about the Board meeting... I think my attention may have wandered halfway through, but I will try to give you some straight answers!

Adam Raoof wrote:Go on then, ask me some specific questions about the Board meeting... I think my attention may have wandered halfway through, but I will try to give you some straight answers!

Ok then!

I would have thought it perfectly proper and reasonable to let council know what Holloid had actually done, measured against the exisiting MoU, and in the light of that information seek council's approval before making any further committment. Why did the board consider in "inappropriate" to consult council before entering into a further MoU or contract with Holloid?

It seems to be that at a time of severe financial constraint for the ECF there are really three big areas of concern

1. The Office
2. Chess for Schools
3. COM

Presumably, we will have to wait until the Farthing review to find out about the Office.

On Chess For Schools - Is this still an ongoing project?

On COM - Was there any discussion of the costs, projected revenues?

Sean Hewitt wrote:

Adam Raoof wrote:Go on then, ask me some specific questions about the Board meeting... I think my attention may have wandered halfway through, but I will try to give you some straight answers!

Ok then!

I would have thought it perfectly proper and reasonable to let council know what Holloid had actually done, measured against the exisiting MoU, and in the light of that information seek council's approval before making any further committment. Why did the board consider in "inappropriate" to consult council before entering into a further MoU or contract with Holloid?

The Board resolved that in future, no MoU with Holloid would be signed without the consent of the Board. We also resolved to adopt the good practice in future of having two Directors sign anything that needs to be signed.

The Board considered the request for Council approval, but felt that the matter was one properly within the remit of the Board. Personally, I believe that the Board is capable of making the right decision on this matter.

Matthew Turner wrote:It seems to be that at a time of severe financial constraint for the ECF there are really three big areas of concern

1. The Office
2. Chess for Schools
3. COM

Presumably, we will have to wait until the Farthing review to find out about the Office.

On Chess For Schools - Is this still an ongoing project?

On COM - Was there any discussion of the costs, projected revenues?

1. Yes, but definitely very positive progress thanks to Andrew Farthing's work.
2. Yes, but we will ensure it doesn't cost the ECF any more money.
3. No, but we have another meeting in a few weeks. This one only got through a half, or maybe two thirds of the agenda. The minutes secretary disappeared halfway through, so I am not sure how much more was recorded.

Adam Raoof wrote:2. Yes, but we will ensure it doesn't cost the ECF any more money.

Cost is the primary issue here of course but how do you then explain to the Schools (perhaps some MP's...) and the general public yet again missing all the deadlines in the publicity?

Carl Hibbard wrote:

Adam Raoof wrote:2. Yes, but we will ensure it doesn't cost the ECF any more money.

Cost is the primary issue here of course but how do you then explain to the Schools (perhaps some MP's...) and the general public yet again missing all the deadlines in the publicity?

I am not sure what the question was there, Carl! Can you be more specific?

I am a little bit disappointed by Adam's answer. It appears the ECF Board have spent time discussing the Chess for Schools Project. That has cost a lot of money (and reputation) but it is dead and we cannot change that now. The Board have then not had time to discuss the COM, which is an ongoing project. This is continuing to cost a lot of money and still offers the opportunity to be a success (measured in various ways). The COM should really be more of a priority for the Board.

Matthew Turner wrote:I am a little bit disappointed by Adam's answer. It appears the ECF Board have spent time discussing the Chess for Schools Project. That has cost a lot of money (and reputation) but it is dead and we cannot change that now. The Board have then not had time to discuss the COM, which is an ongoing project. This is continuing to cost a lot of money and still offers the opportunity to be a success (measured in various ways). The COM should really be more of a priority for the Board.

I sympathise, but we didn't spend long on CfS. We spent a long time discussing AF's review, which I am sure you will agree is a very worthwhile project.

Adam Raoof wrote:I am not sure what the question was there, Carl! Can you be more specific?

8,000 schools applied perhaps 2 years ago and we "might" be at perhaps 500?

A date of July this year is mentioned all over the place, so we (the ECF...) are going to say what now on the project?

Or are we quietly shifting to the 2009-2012 charity programme that is now appearing in print?

Adam Raoof wrote:

Sean Hewitt wrote:

Adam Raoof wrote:Go on then, ask me some specific questions about the Board meeting... I think my attention may have wandered halfway through, but I will try to give you some straight answers!

Ok then!

I would have thought it perfectly proper and reasonable to let council know what Holloid had actually done, measured against the exisiting MoU, and in the light of that information seek council's approval before making any further committment. Why did the board consider in "inappropriate" to consult council before entering into a further MoU or contract with Holloid?

The Board resolved that in future, no MoU with Holloid would be signed without the consent of the Board. We also resolved to adopt the good practice in future of having two Directors sign anything that needs to be signed.

The Board considered the request for Council approval, but felt that the matter was one properly within the remit of the Board. Personally, I believe that the Board is capable of making the right decision on this matter.

Adam,

I'm sure the baord felt the issue was within in it's own remit and I am sure each member of the board feels the board is able to make the right decision. However, my question was not about the boards abilty! My question was "Why did the board consider in "inappropriate" to consult council before entering into a further MoU or contract with Holloid?"

You can answer that here if you wish, although you will also get the opportunity to do so at the forthcoming EGM.