Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Debate directly related to English Chess Federation matters.
Ian Thompson
Posts: 2109
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: Awbridge, Hampshire

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Ian Thompson » Thu May 23, 2019 11:42 pm

Hok Yin Stephen Chiu wrote:
Thu May 23, 2019 11:33 pm
Perhaps, we could put an amendment to the next Council meeting, restricting Council members (Directors, Members Reps included) from representing more than two constituencies (proxies included). This may put the impetus onto local leagues/associations to elected their own delegates, in turn that would make Council larger and widen the representation of chess opinions across the country?
It might, but I suspect the more likely outcome if the number of proxies someone could hold was limited would be that leagues would be unrepresented at the meeting so their vote wouldn't be cast.

Hok Yin Stephen Chiu
Posts: 99
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 7:52 pm

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Hok Yin Stephen Chiu » Fri May 24, 2019 12:12 am

IM Jack Rudd wrote:
Thu May 23, 2019 11:37 pm
Hok Yin Stephen Chiu wrote:
Thu May 23, 2019 11:33 pm
Perhaps, we could put an amendment to the next Council meeting, restricting Council members (Directors, Members Reps included) from representing more than two constituencies (proxies included). This may put the impetus onto local leagues/associations to elected their own delegates, in turn that would make Council larger and widen the representation of chess opinions across the country?
I don't think Council has the capacity to impose that rule.
This naturally leads onto the question of, why not? It does not appear to contravene any existing regulations. I am sure the original system was not designed to led to the current scenario, where at the last AGM 2018, of the 47 who attended (holding 290 votes), 10 members held more than half the present votes.
All views are my own/represent chess organisations that I'm part of/or neither!
Vice Chair & Delegate - Coventry and District Chess League | fmr-President -Warwick Chess

Celebrating 100 Years of the Coventry & District Chess League 1919-2019

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Fri May 24, 2019 12:39 am

Hok Yin Stephen Chiu wrote:
Fri May 24, 2019 12:12 am
IM Jack Rudd wrote:
Thu May 23, 2019 11:37 pm
Hok Yin Stephen Chiu wrote:
Thu May 23, 2019 11:33 pm
Perhaps, we could put an amendment to the next Council meeting, restricting Council members (Directors, Members Reps included) from representing more than two constituencies (proxies included). This may put the impetus onto local leagues/associations to elected their own delegates, in turn that would make Council larger and widen the representation of chess opinions across the country?
I don't think Council has the capacity to impose that rule.
This naturally leads onto the question of, why not? It does not appear to contravene any existing regulations.
It isn't a matter of the regulations, it's a matter of company law.

Hok Yin Stephen Chiu
Posts: 99
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 7:52 pm

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Hok Yin Stephen Chiu » Fri May 24, 2019 1:09 am

IM Jack Rudd wrote:
Fri May 24, 2019 12:39 am
Hok Yin Stephen Chiu wrote:
Fri May 24, 2019 12:12 am
IM Jack Rudd wrote:
Thu May 23, 2019 11:37 pm

I don't think Council has the capacity to impose that rule.
This naturally leads onto the question of, why not? It does not appear to contravene any existing regulations.
It isn't a matter of the regulations, it's a matter of company law.
It's not clear that the proposal is in contravention to any specific clause in the company law act 2006?
All views are my own/represent chess organisations that I'm part of/or neither!
Vice Chair & Delegate - Coventry and District Chess League | fmr-President -Warwick Chess

Celebrating 100 Years of the Coventry & District Chess League 1919-2019

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 1701
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Fri May 24, 2019 2:30 am

Hok Yin Stephen Chiu wrote:
Thu May 23, 2019 11:33 pm


Perhaps, we could put an amendment to the next Council meeting, restricting Council members (Directors, Members Reps included) from representing more than two constituencies (proxies included). This may put the impetus onto local leagues/associations to elected their own delegates, in turn that would make Council larger and widen the representation of chess opinions across the country?

I doubt we can revolutionize local chess in one fair swoop, but, how about start by widening the reach and voices at Council?
Leaving aside the problems and company law and no representation at all that have been raised earlier, all Hok's proposal would do would increase the number of delegates without any guarantee it would lead to more voices. If a holder of multiple votes was forced to divest some of them they could probably ensure the appointment of a deputy who would vote exactly the same way.

I'd also quibble that a broader spectrum of opinions wouldn't change anything. It would just lead to a more packed debating hall with people waving the order papers at each other. What we do need are 21st century organisers like yourself empowered to grow the player base.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2352
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Adam Raoof » Fri May 24, 2019 7:35 am

Hok Yin Stephen Chiu wrote:
Thu May 23, 2019 11:33 pm

I doubt we can revolutionize local chess in one fair swoop, but, how about start by widening the reach and voices at Council?
One member one vote. No block votes. No votes for leagues or counties or tournament organisers. No proxies. No taxation without representation.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 6321
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by JustinHorton » Fri May 24, 2019 7:38 am

Hok Yin Stephen Chiu wrote:
Fri May 24, 2019 1:09 am
IM Jack Rudd wrote:
Fri May 24, 2019 12:39 am
Hok Yin Stephen Chiu wrote:
Fri May 24, 2019 12:12 am


This naturally leads onto the question of, why not? It does not appear to contravene any existing regulations.
It isn't a matter of the regulations, it's a matter of company law.
It's not clear that the proposal is in contravention to any specific clause in the company law act 2006?
As far as I'm aware, it's ages since we had a ruck on here involving the Companies Act but it is true that it tends to be dramatically invoked, rather than explained. I mean I'm sure it's right, but it wouldn't hurt to see Hok's question answered.

The amassing of proxies is at any rate a pretty tawdry affair: it doesn't really "represent" anybody.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 421
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Paul Cooksey » Fri May 24, 2019 8:40 am

Hok Yin Stephen Chiu wrote:
Fri May 24, 2019 1:09 am
It's not clear that the proposal is in contravention to any specific clause in the company law act 2006?
I generally regard it as a half truth; it seems to me the right of members to appoint proxies is clear https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/20 ... ng/proxies but the ECF has some flexibility on how it defines members if it really wants to change.

I hadn't read the Pearce report for a while. https://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-cont ... -FINAL.pdf . Section 5 remains problematic for me

NickFaulks
Posts: 5033
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by NickFaulks » Fri May 24, 2019 9:11 am

JustinHorton wrote:
Fri May 24, 2019 7:38 am
As far as I'm aware, it's ages since we had a ruck on here involving the Companies Act but it is true that it tends to be dramatically invoked, rather than explained. I mean I'm sure it's right, but it wouldn't hurt to see Hok's question answered.
I'm not familiar with the reasons why the ECF ended up with a structure governed by the Companies Act but, judging by the regularity with which we hear the argument "we know what would be good but the CA doesn't permit it", it doesn't seem particularly well suited to its purpose.
The amassing of proxies is at any rate a pretty tawdry affair: it doesn't really "represent" anybody.
Not for the first time, the ECF follows practices tried by FIDE ( and criticised by the ECF itself ) and eventually rejected. The previous FIDE administration was forced to modify its proxy policy to the extent that no delegate could hold more than one proxy, but even then the effect in 2018 was that after redistribution Makro and all of his close associates turned up with two votes. The first act of the newcomers was to cut through the problem in the most radical fashion by outlawing proxies altogether.

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2352
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Adam Raoof » Fri May 24, 2019 9:16 am

Even those of us who appoint proxies do not think it is fair.

However you have to reform the whole voting system, not just tinker around the edges. Why should people pay a membership fee to the ECF and not have a direct say in what their money is spent on, or at least be able to directly vote for representatives to make those decisions?

David Sedgwick
Posts: 3442
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by David Sedgwick » Fri May 24, 2019 10:05 am

NickFaulks wrote:
Fri May 24, 2019 9:11 am
I'm not familiar with the reasons why the ECF ended up with a structure governed by the Companies Act but, judging by the regularity with which we hear the argument "we know what would be good but the CA doesn't permit it", it doesn't seem particularly well suited to its purpose.
The alternative of remaining an unincoporated association, with members having unlimited liability, was not an attractive one. It was becoming increasingly difficult to find people willing to serve as Directors under that structure.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 8880
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Alex Holowczak » Fri May 24, 2019 10:50 am

It isn't even a case of banning/restricting proxies.

If Organisation A wants to appoint Person A as its delegate, then he's perfectly entitled to do so without restriction. Organisations B, C, D ... could also appoint Person A as their delegate. Suddenly Person A has lots of votes without any need for proxies. Even if proxies were able to be banned, then I expect you'd see much the same people turning up to Council meetings as you do now, they'd just be delegates instead of proxies.

Chris Fegan
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 11:31 am

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Chris Fegan » Fri May 24, 2019 11:01 am

Adam Raoof wrote:
Fri May 24, 2019 9:16 am
Even those of us who appoint proxies do not think it is fair.

However you have to reform the whole voting system, not just tinker around the edges. Why should people pay a membership fee to the ECF and not have a direct say in what their money is spent on, or at least be able to directly vote for representatives to make those decisions?
Adan R is Absolutely correct-the ECF voting system for ECF Council, etc continues too be a total farce and embarrassment and only OMOV will ever bring proper fairness and modernisation to the ECF.

NickFaulks
Posts: 5033
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by NickFaulks » Fri May 24, 2019 11:04 am

Alex Holowczak wrote:
Fri May 24, 2019 10:50 am
If Organisation A wants to appoint Person A as its delegate, then he's perfectly entitled to do so without restriction. Organisations B, C, D ... could also appoint Person A as their delegate. Suddenly Person A has lots of votes without any need for proxies. Even if proxies were able to be banned, then I expect you'd see much the same people turning up to Council meetings as you do now, they'd just be delegates instead of proxies.
That is in fact what Hok wants to eliminate. Like you and others, I wondered how it could actually be done, although but for the Companies Act ( I assume ) the Mem & Arts could say whatever Council wants them to say.

If I play for one club in the London League, I cannot play for another in the same season. What would be wrong with having a similar rule for ECF Delegates? I'm not saying it's necessarily a good idea, merely that it isn't ridiculous.

Mick Norris
Posts: 7415
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Mick Norris » Fri May 24, 2019 11:11 am

Paul Cooksey wrote:
Fri May 24, 2019 8:40 am
I hadn't read the Pearce report for a while. https://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-cont ... -FINAL.pdf . Section 5 remains problematic for me
Thanks for the link Paul; I can't remember looking at it for ages; is there a review somewhere of how much of it was implemented?

Dare I say, is it now time to look at these issues again, in the light of experience?
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

Post Reply