AGM : 15 October 2011

[Paul Cooksey]

If somone is in contact with Andrew at the office, maybe they could ask him to look at the format of the FIDE Delegates report.

Reading the xml, Dr Short remains less than completely satisfied by FIDE

[Mike Gunn]

In answer to Jomathan above:

Although I am chairing the meeting on Saturday, I am also representing the SCCA and so I will table these questions, if you wish. It may well be that the response to some of these points will be that they lie outside the jurisdiction of the ECF (of course).

[John Upham]

I note in the DoMs report:

Whether Signpost continues to need to be published is highly questionable and will be reviewed.

Curious as to what SIgnpost is or was I rang the Battle Office. Signpost would appear the section at the rear of the Yearbook listing contact names and details.

Do you believe it needs to be included in the Yearbook? Discuss!

[Alex McFarlane]

Is there any truth in the rumour that RDK will be opening the AGM? I would hate Malcolm Pein missing it again if he were.

To remove any doubt I can assure everyone that he will NOT be opening the Scarborough Congress next weekend!!

[Mick Norris]

Reverting to the initial subject of this thread, my Report is now available at http://www.englishchess.org.uk/?page_id=897 (as is the Report of Nigel Short as FIDE Delegate).

I've apologised to members of Council for the lateness of my Report. I'd like to make a similar apology to members of this Forum.

That's OK, it was worth the wait

Just a pity that when reports are added to the website, it doesn't have a date next to the to say when (for those of us who downloaded the first few reports some time ago)

[Jonathan Bryant]

In answer to Jomathan above:

Although I am chairing the meeting on Saturday, I am also representing the SCCA and so I will table these questions, if you wish. It may well be that the response to some of these points will be that they lie outside the jurisdiction of the ECF (of course).

Thanks Mike. I appreciate it.

While I agree that with some of the points it might be impossible for the ECF to give a definitive answer - I doubt that the AGM would be able to provide accounts for the Staunton Memorial Dinner for example - in the circumstances I would expect the ECF to be taking a view on the activities of their President (whether or not that person is still their President).

[David Sedgwick]

I note in the DoMs report:

Whether Signpost continues to need to be published is highly questionable and will be reviewed.

Curious as to what SIgnpost is or was I rang the Battle Office. Signpost would appear the section at the rear of the Yearbook listing contact names and details.

Do you believe it needs to be included in the Yearbook? Discuss!

Thanks John. I'd missed that comment in the Director's Report.

In answer to your question, I consider it an essential part of the Yearbook.

[Jonathan Rogers]

Following on from JB

In particular, a question why the President thought it was appropriate to invite Ray Keene to open the British would manifestly be a question about his exercise of his office as President, and would not seem to be a matter that would ask the President to divulge anything confidential. I hope that someone asks the question and presses for an answer, with a potential follow-up, e.g whether the President understood why his action might be seen as controversial.

[Mick Norris]

Following on from JB

In particular, a question why the President thought it was appropriate to invite Ray Keene to open the British would manifestly be a question about his exercise of his office as President, and would not seem to be a matter that would ask the President to divulge anything confidential. I hope that someone asks the question and presses for an answer, with a potential follow-up, e.g whether the President understood why his action might be seen as controversial.

It is certainly a matter I intend to raise, however I understood that CJ wouldn't be there to answer

[Adam Raoof]

Following on from JB

In particular, a question why the President thought it was appropriate to invite Ray Keene to open the British would manifestly be a question about his exercise of his office as President, and would not seem to be a matter that would ask the President to divulge anything confidential. I hope that someone asks the question and presses for an answer, with a potential follow-up, e.g whether the President understood why his action might be seen as controversial.

It is certainly a matter I intend to raise, however I understood that CJ wouldn't be there to answer

You will be able to ask his representative, Mr Nigel Short.

[Adam Raoof]

Surely we are not turning the clock back to the days when the President was not present to answer potenially difficult questions. The last President got plenty of adverse comments on this forum for doing just that and I had hoped those days were behind us.

One must say this. Recent events have not been good publicty for the ECF and at the very least our President ought to be at the AGM to answer questions relevant to those difficulties. His absence can only be seen as an unwillingness to address them as demonstrated in his Presidents report which is as bland as they come. Regretfully I have to say that my hope we had entered a new era with CJ's appointment has been badly shaken

One can also conclude that perhaps his re-elction is a done deal and he therefore feels no need to attend the meeting. If that is so then we have learnt nothing as an organisation.

You may not be aware that CJ is in Glasgow filming the new series of Eggheads at the BBC.

Nigel was appointed by CJ as his proxy, and he was present at the British so he may be able to contribute to the discussion.

[Roger de Coverly]

Surely we are not turning the clock back to the days when the President was not present to answer potenially difficult questions. The last President got plenty of adverse comments on this forum for doing just that and I had hoped those days were behind us.

His absence seems to have been known for a couple of months. See the thread on Nigel Short Tour 2 at http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=2781 and later.

[Jonathan Bryant]

Nigel was appointed by CJ as his proxy, and he was present at the British so he may be able to contribute to the discussion.

Unfortunately he was also the main beneficiary of the Nigel Short simul tour, for which CJ repeatedly promised to provide accounts but failed to do so when reminded. It's also one of the events for which CJ has given conflicting figures for the amount of money said to have been raised for the British Championship in Sheffield.

To say that Nosher is not the ideal person to be speaking on the President's behalf on this matter is an understatement to say the least.

[Adam Raoof]

IF CJ is not going to be present then I feel the CEO ought to be the one to try and answer questions not Nigel Short CJ's friend.

Accepted, and that will probably be the case. You have to feel sorry for the CEO!

[Andrew Farthing]

IF CJ is not going to be present then I feel the CEO ought to be the one to try and answer questions not Nigel Short CJ's friend.

Accepted, and that will probably be the case. You have to feel sorry for the CEO!

No need to feel sorry for me - it goes with the territory.

I've always tried to be open and honest during the last 12 months, and I'll do my best to answer whatever questions are posed on Saturday.