No news is bad news

[Ben Purton]

"What we see here John is classic ECF Bump and run"- In american accent.

"ECF fooled all the mugs and BOOM, look at that hit".

What else do they need to do for a regime change?

Ben

[IM Jack Rudd]

What else do they need to do for a regime change?

A new regime willing to take over is usually the first requirement. In the absence of one of those, a regime change doesn't normally happen.

[John Upham]

A requirement for anyone considering being part of a regime change is that they would be permitted to get on with things without being blocked. i.e. A Director would be allowed to direct.

I suspect any candidates who want to achieve things would be fearful of running into a brick wall once they were in post.

Maybe I could ask Martin R., Claire W., Peter S. and Mike T. to add their experiences in this regard?

The question therefore remains : how can good candidates be brought in for the 2009 AGM?

[Mick Norris]

I guess you need to start with a serious debate, as Martin suggested, about what the ECF is for i.e. what it should do, and just as importantly what it should not do

You can then see how much money you need to do it

You might then see what would be the best structure for it i.e. should it remain a Federation or move to a membership organisation with some form of OMOV

[JustinHorton]

You might then see what would be the best structure for it i.e. should it remain a Federation or move to a membership organisation with some form of OMOV

Structures are important, I think. If you want people to have power you need to have a structure that lets them have it. On the other hand, you may want there to be checks and balances: but you need to discuss what you want - not just in terms of structrures but i nterms of policy - before you know whether or not people want it, or whether or not they at least understand it.

[Steve Henderson]

A requirement for anyone considering being part of a regime change is that they would be permitted to get on with things without being blocked. i.e. A Director would be allowed to direct.

I suspect any candidates who want to achieve things would be fearful of running into a brick wall once they were in post.

Maybe I could ask Martin R., Claire W., Peter S. and Mike T. to add their experiences in this regard?

The question therefore remains : how can good candidates be brought in for the 2009 AGM?

John, if I read your post correctly you seem to be indicating that someone or something is blocking people - would this be true in Andrew Martins case?

[John Upham]

"You may well think that, but I couldn't possibly comment".

[Carl Hibbard]

"You may well think that, but I couldn't possibly comment".

The latest "Achievement Report" lists the job as this:-

Director of Chess for Schools:
Has overall responsibility for supervising the national Chess for Schools scheme. This includes the delivery of the chess sets supplied by the sponsors to the schools, development and sale of follow-up support packagers to schools, and the establishment of a national network of affiliated chess academies. Is also responsible for identification and implementation of any other measures necessary to ensure the success of the Chess for Schools scheme.

Is responsible for the work of the Manager of Chess for Schools and any other officers who may be appointed to support the initiative.

Liaises with any other ECF officers who are supporting the scheme and in particular the Director of Marketing, the Director of Junior Chess & Education, the Manager of Coaching, and the ECF Office.

[Matthew Turner]

OMOV is for the future, but I doubt it will make a big difference. We need a way out of the current impasse. I suggest that there a number of things that have to happen now.

1. Gerry Walsh and Peter Wilson resign from all their posts within the ECF

2. Bobby Richmond is persuaded to take on the Finance post on a permanent basis

3. A respected person takes over as President, I suggest someone like Brian Smith, who has no baggage.

4. The ECF honours it comitment to schools by purchasing chess sets using John Robinson funding.

There are other thing that will need to happen over time, but this would it at least restore some credibility.

[Sean Hewitt]

OMOV is for the future, but I doubt it will make a big difference. We need a way out of the current impasse. I suggest that there a number of things that have to happen now.

1. Gerry Walsh and Peter Wilson resign from all their posts within the ECF

2. Bobby Richmond is persuaded to take on the Finance post on a permanent basis

3. A respected person takes over as President, I suggest someone like Brian Smith, who has no baggage.

4. The ECF honours it comitment to schools by purchasing chess sets using John Robinson funding.

There are other thing that will need to happen over time, but this would it at least restore some credibility.

Matthew,

As I understand it, it is not permitted to spend the capital of the JR legacy (with good reason IMO). Even if it were allowed, purchasing 250,000 chess sets and paying to deliver them to schools would wipe out the entire fund, which would be bad in the long run. The best the ECF can do is (if the Holloid deal has gone pear shaped) is to explain this to schools and to offer at cost sets to those schools that want them. This would not be expensive for the schools (say £30=£35 for ten sets) and should not be a barrier to those that have any interest in the game at all. Indeed, if a school were not prepared to pay this, then they are not really interested are they?

I dont know Brian Smith so can't comment if he would be any good as President. But what we need on the board is dynamism. And you are not going to get dynamic, capable people- experienced at running companies (like me for example) standing for election when the structure is such that you are not allowed to get on and do the things that need to be done. OMOV is a red herring in this regard. No sensible business would run the way the ECF does. The directors need to be able to make decisions and run the company. If you dont like what they've done, get rid of them at the next election.

[John Upham]

And you are not going to get dynamic, capable people- experienced at running companies (like me for example)

Sean,

Are you updating your CV by any chance?

J.

[Sean Hewitt]

Are you updating your CV by any chance?

You must be joking!

Not until directors can direct at any rate.

[Paul Stimpson]

As I understand it, it is not permitted to spend the capital of the JR legacy (with good reason IMO). Even if it were allowed, purchasing 250,000 chess sets and paying to deliver them to schools would wipe out the entire fund, which would be bad in the long run.

Sean, I totally agree with Matthew, though obviously the ECF cannot fund the full set delivery on current funds.

The best the ECF can do is (if the Holloid deal has gone pear shaped) is to explain this to schools and to offer at cost sets to those schools that want them. This would not be expensive for the schools (say £30=£35 for ten sets) and should not be a barrier to those that have any interest in the game at all. Indeed, if a school were not prepared to pay this, then they are not really interested are they?

Sean, do you honestly believe the ECF can have the cheek to do this?

If the Holloid deal is dead then the ECF must work with a major supplier at a discount and with additional sponsorship and with the possibility of funding from selling extras to the schools to provide these sets.

The main points that force the ECF hand are :-

The ECF have publicly announced this project.

They have also announced this to every MP in the country.

All Schools in the country have more or less signed up.

Given the above It must be done, otherwise the ECF and sadly chess in this country will be forever tainted.

[John Upham]

There is an almost credible way to save face here :

There could be a joint announcement along the lines that recent unexpected changes in the economic climate has forced a re-evaluation of the viability of this excting project. Until such times as financial stability returns to the market, the project for free sets is put on ice.

or something along those lines. That way both parties can escape from the premature public commitments without having been seen to give up.

[Matthew Turner]

Just for clarification, I am not suggesting that the ECF buy 250,000 chess sets. A number of schools have applied for sets, let's say it is 6,000 (this seems high to me). This would require the ECF to buy 60,000 chess sets. On bulk, chess sets (with boards) cost about £4 each I believe, therefore the total cost to the ECF would be £240,000. Yes, a lot of money, but perfectly possible within the JR funds.
I believe there are very few limits imposed by John Robinson on the distribution of his legacy, so if the ECF had the will (no pun intended) then there is no reason why funds should not be used to purchase sets.