The Reform of ECF Council

Debate directly related to English Chess Federation matters.
Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: The Reform of ECF Council

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Oct 20, 2021 1:00 am

Ian Thompson wrote:
Wed Oct 20, 2021 12:28 am
How many of the 10,000 or so Direct Members are Individual Members of the ECF as defined in the Articles? I've never seen any figures for that.)
Those who were FIDE rated from 2005 when the ECF was established to around 201? when the ECF realised that it was a fairy tale that FIDE required rated players to sign ECF white forms. I dare say some NCCU "northern members" can be thrown in as well.

I recall signing one in 2005. I read it very carefully to make sure I wasn't signing up to unlimited liability for the ECF's debts. The then County Secretary was asked to sign one as well on behalf of the County Association.

It does raise an interesting question as to what extent those who have agreed to guarantee the ECF's debts, even at only £ 1 a head, have rights that others don't have.

User avatar
Chris Goodall
Posts: 1057
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 6:40 pm
Contact:

Re: The Reform of ECF Council

Post by Chris Goodall » Wed Oct 20, 2021 9:35 am

John Upham wrote:
Mon Oct 18, 2021 5:15 pm
I invite proposals from the floor as to potential reforms for ECF Council.

Of course, you might suggest all is wonderful and it can hold its head high as a model of democracy in action.
Electoral college system.

I haven't developed this idea much because Michael may well tell me it's illegal, but: if a handful of delegates stepped forward in advance of the meeting and declared how they planned to vote on each of the questions, we could then mail all the vote-holders and say, any organisation anywhere in the country who agrees with one of these people may endorse that person as their proxy.

Which organisations had endorsed which delegates would never be known. The named representative of the organisation would communicate that to Michael privately, who would put "Yes" in the Proxy column of the voting register. At the start of the meeting, it would be announced how many votes each delegate had collected, but not which ones. The delegate would then be expected to cast all of their votes in the same way, and would not arouse any suspicion by doing so.

Maybe I am solving the wrong problem here? The most anti-democratic thing I've seen happen around an ECF AGM is that a certain county committee held a vote on who to support for a certain senior directorate, and then a certain unsuccessful candidate demanded the names and phone numbers of the committee members who had voted against him - in the interest of, erm, "accountability". So under my proposal, that candidate would never know that that organisation had voted against him.
Donate to Sabrina's fundraiser at https://gofund.me/aeae42c7 to support victims of sexual abuse in the chess world.

Northumberland webmaster, Jesmond CC something-or-other. Views mine. Definitely below the Goodall Line.

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 1519
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: The Reform of ECF Council

Post by Paul Cooksey » Wed Oct 20, 2021 12:26 pm

I think we are going to be jumping backwards and forwards between strategic and practical matters in this thread. But they are interrelated, so maybe not a bad thing.

For me the biggest thing is allocation of votes, and what changes there, if anything, informs some of the other debate. Back in 2015 the Pearce Report said "While we believe a good theoretical case can be made for some sort of reform of Council" there were more pressing matters that should have been dealt with first. On the whole they have been, so think we can now legitimately consider it at the top of the Governance/ Reform agenda.

Lots of points I want to respond to, but on secret ballots first. I think generally when thinking about the ECF it useful to first decide whether it is acting like a company or a Parliament, or some hybrid which is neither. On the whole I like the idea of Council acting like the House of Commons, with voting members the equivalent of MPs except where company law forbids it.

I understand now why secret ballots were introduced, and if good relations between individuals were the only factor, I would see no reason to change. But that seems quite a lightweight reason. Directors know better than anyone else who amongst their colleagues supports them. If they really wanted to create a paper wall so no one else could tell, they could give all their other votes to friends. Malcolm Pein only had one vote in the last AGM. But if anyone believes that is the extent of his influence, I have a bridge they might like to buy.

As the MP for Berkshire - and I am pompous enough to think about myself in those terms - I think my votes should be public so I am accountable to my electorate. But more than that I think the ECF can legitimately say to organisations that if you want to exercise your votes, you need to send someone who is willing to have their votes published. The ECF has a problem that people say Council is detached and unaccountable, and can legitimately try to fix that issue.

I don't think this is particularly controversial and am seriously considering proposing it to the next Council.

Hok Yin Stephen Chiu
Posts: 148
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 7:52 pm

Re: The Reform of ECF Council

Post by Hok Yin Stephen Chiu » Wed Oct 20, 2021 1:58 pm

John Upham wrote:
Mon Oct 18, 2021 5:15 pm
I invite proposals from the floor as to potential reforms for ECF Council.

Of course, you might suggest all is wonderful and it can hold its head high as a model of democracy in action.
Without going into the maths too much, I wager that the system of half games representing the amount of chess being played is probably representative of how much your average member, in turn, club/league/regional union, cares about the things affecting their chess.

The OMOV debates are interesting, but it is not entirely clear how it would work. At one of the last direct members reps elections, most candidates got about 40-50 apiece, hardly the grandest example of democracy in action, in an organisation that claims 10k members, and to represnt 1 million chess members in the country!

The simplest way to ensure Council is not decided by the main blocks/voices seems to be to pervent any individual from representing more than three constituent organisations. I'm quite sure someone did a calculatinon here once, that the top 10 delegates hold a ridiculous high proportion of the total votes.

Perhaps someone might enlighten me whether is it legal to propose such caps?
G. Secretary, https://WarwickChessAlumni.blogspot.com/
Delegate - Leamington
FIDE Arbiter

User avatar
Chris Goodall
Posts: 1057
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 6:40 pm
Contact:

Re: The Reform of ECF Council

Post by Chris Goodall » Wed Oct 20, 2021 2:03 pm

Paul Cooksey wrote:
Wed Oct 20, 2021 12:26 pm
The ECF has a problem that people say Council is detached and unaccountable,
Which people say that, and what were they trying to hold Council accountable for?
Donate to Sabrina's fundraiser at https://gofund.me/aeae42c7 to support victims of sexual abuse in the chess world.

Northumberland webmaster, Jesmond CC something-or-other. Views mine. Definitely below the Goodall Line.

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2720
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: The Reform of ECF Council

Post by Adam Raoof » Wed Oct 20, 2021 2:07 pm

This is all very complicated, perhaps unnecessarily. All members should have one vote. Votes should be for positions, not referendums on topics. Membership should be simpler and needs reform. Voting should be online, and confidential.

All members should be entitled to attend the AGM, as you would be able to in a company as a shareholder or attend a council meeting as a resident.
Adam Raoof IA, IO
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Don’t stop playing chess!

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: The Reform of ECF Council

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Oct 20, 2021 2:10 pm

Hok Yin Stephen Chiu wrote:
Wed Oct 20, 2021 1:58 pm
Perhaps someone might enlighten me whether is it legal to propose such caps?
It's fine for unincorporated organisations such as clubs, leagues or most county associations. It isn't for Companies limited by Guarantee which is the legal structure of the ECF and a handful of county associations. Multiple proxies have to be allowed because of Company Law.

How to handle the issue of individuals who don't express an opinion is one of the bigger challenges any OMOV structure would have to solve.

If you could assume that everyone would have an opinion and express it, you could continue with meetings where you didn't expect attendance of more than around fifty people. Proxies would be given to your favoured representative who would volunteer to attend.

J T Melsom
Posts: 1294
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: The Reform of ECF Council

Post by J T Melsom » Wed Oct 20, 2021 2:33 pm

I think there may be a need to reflect on whether we are opposed to block votes - which I take to be multiple votes per organisation- or proxy votes or both. For some organisations there is a considerable cost in time and travel in attending an ECF meeting, the agenda of which is often of relatively little consequence. We should respect that in our thinking. And we should also be clear on what the output might be, a more democratic process won't necessarily be one marked by a significant uplift in engagement. It might be better in principle, but any bigger claims seem to be getting ahead of ourselves.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: The Reform of ECF Council

Post by JustinHorton » Wed Oct 20, 2021 2:41 pm

Paul Cooksey wrote:
Wed Oct 20, 2021 12:26 pm
On the whole I like the idea of Council acting like the House of Commons, with voting members the equivalent of MPs
if we're thinking of the Commons in about 1821 maybe
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: The Reform of ECF Council

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Oct 20, 2021 2:55 pm

J T Melsom wrote:
Wed Oct 20, 2021 2:33 pm
I think there may be a need to reflect on whether we are opposed to block votes - which I take to be multiple votes per organisation- or proxy votes or both.
There's a third example. That's where one individual, as well as proxies, holds the voting rights of several organisations and votes the same way, seemingly their personal choice, on all of them.

It's noticeable on the recently published card votes, just how few individuals there were who were opposed to formal acceptance of the NED and Governance reports.

J T Melsom
Posts: 1294
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: The Reform of ECF Council

Post by J T Melsom » Wed Oct 20, 2021 3:05 pm

There's a third example. That's where one individual, as well as proxies, holds the voting rights of several organisations and votes the same way, seemingly their personal choice, on all of them.

That's speculation though - the proxies might well be directed. The Chair holds directed proxies as well. This needs to be distinguished from those who vote irrespective of the wishes of constituents.

Mick Norris
Posts: 10310
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: The Reform of ECF Council

Post by Mick Norris » Wed Oct 20, 2021 5:48 pm

Adam Raoof wrote:
Wed Oct 20, 2021 2:07 pm
This is all very complicated, perhaps unnecessarily. All members should have one vote. Votes should be for positions, not referendums on topics. Membership should be simpler and needs reform. Voting should be online, and confidential.

All members should be entitled to attend the AGM, as you would be able to in a company as a shareholder or attend a council meeting as a resident.
I'm not against the principle, Adam, but I do question the venue cost to the ECF; how many members would attend?

We have the advantage in the MCF that we know the maximum number of people that can attend our AGM and can find a suitable venue accordingly (when in person AGMs resume, our last 2 have been via Zoom)

I'd have thought a simpler version of OMOV would be one John Reyes one vote :wink:
Any postings on here represent my personal views

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2720
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: The Reform of ECF Council

Post by Adam Raoof » Wed Oct 20, 2021 5:55 pm

You do the same as the local council, you just put a maximum number on non voting attendees. It's not like members are beating the door down to attend meetings, their elected reps are there for that purpose.
Adam Raoof IA, IO
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Don’t stop playing chess!

Nick Grey
Posts: 1838
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:16 am

Re: The Reform of ECF Council

Post by Nick Grey » Wed Oct 20, 2021 8:32 pm

I question why the counts not final before leaving the venue, I owe PAUL a drink

Angus French
Posts: 2149
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Contact:

Re: The Reform of ECF Council

Post by Angus French » Wed Oct 20, 2021 8:35 pm

Adam Raoof wrote:
Wed Oct 20, 2021 2:07 pm
All members should be entitled to attend the AGM, as you would be able to in a company as a shareholder or attend a council meeting as a resident.
Adam Raoof wrote:
Wed Oct 20, 2021 5:55 pm
You do the same as the local council, you just put a maximum number on non voting attendees.
I'm sorry, Adam, but I'm unable to reconcile these two statements.

I'm also curious to know - and I think it's germane to this thread - why your congresses voted against approving the NEDs' report.

Post Reply