Emergency Board Meeting - Draft Minutes

[Jonathan Rogers]

There are a hundred things one could say about all this. One of them might well be, as Justin says, that no one emerges with much credit. For example, I do take AP's point that Nigel's position is not analogous to that of a whistleblower and many of the criticisms of AP were known when Council elected him; although, buried in the minutes above, I do find that DO's point ten, referring to AP's dealings with Rupert Jones, to be worthy of further elaboration.

But to be brief, the overall picture seems clear. The release of the draft memorandum is a huge development since the October election. Most normal people (and Council members too!) will be asking themselves not merely "is anything like that currently in force now"? but also "how could such an agreement ever have been thought to be in the interests of chess?" As far as I can see, AP has not addressed the latter question and the denial to the first question would carry more weight if he were voluntarily to release AGON's accounts.

It seems to me that in normal politics, this is where the affected person gives his side of the story but also offers his resignation, explaining that the organisation must come first and that regrettably it can only get on with its good work without the current distraction, etc.

[Mick Norris]

The concept of the evil Pein with his minions determining ECF policy as Directors is an interesting one, but given said evil Pein actually lost to "none of the above" in an ECF election, in practice those who work with or for Chess in Schools or the London Classic can or should be regarded as independent.

He isn't evil

Malcolm wouldn't have lost, though, if the then ECF Board had been allowed to vote i.e. the correct procedures had been followed - so, a number of Council voters, some of whom are on the current board, voted for him

Remember, he wasn't at the meeting, and CJ told us that Malcolm was too busy to attend meetings, and would only read emails that had been filtered by CJ

I still don't think that made Malcolm a suitable NED, and still question the judgement of those who thought it did

If he had the time, Malcolm could no doubt make a positive contribution to the ECF, but he may serve English Chess better by staying out of ECF affairs

[Carl Hibbard]

More information can be found anywhere but here:

http://www.englishchess.org.uk/

[Roger de Coverly]

If he had the time, Malcolm could no doubt make a positive contribution to the ECF, but he may serve English Chess better by staying out of ECF affairs

It's a fantasy, is it not, for AP to even be able to find around half a dozen people prepared to stand for election as ECF Directors and be his Board supporters, let alone persuade a majority of the voting membership to vote for them. If ECF Directors are accused of being Pein employees because they work with or at CSC activities, that must also apply to some Council members as well.

The Polgar blog also has the presentation by AP to the ECF Board regarding the Agon contract.
http://susanpolgar.blogspot.co.uk/2014/ ... -chaos.htm

from which

Under the AGON/FIDE Contract (unanimously approved by the Presidential Board; ratified by the General Assembly; publicly available since February 2012), the first four years (two World Championship Cycles, not including the World Cup — 2012-2015) cost AGON over €20m, of which FIDE receives €1.75m (prize fund commissions, the rest being overhead, product development, event costs and prize funds)

As we are now about eighteen months into the "first four years", it should be possible to disclose how much has actually been spent and who did the spending. Agon appeared to have little or nothing to do with Grand Prix events from the London candidates onwards. Perhaps not made public, but the ECF Board could have been disclosed the figures under a confidentiality agreement.

[JustinHorton]

The release of the draft memorandum is a huge development since the October election.

Bloke, about whom we knew no more than that he had been appointed to run chess events by Kirsan, turns out to have working relationship with Kirsan shock.

It seems to me that in normal politics, this is where the affected person gives his side of the story but also offers his resignation, explaining that the organisation must come first and that regrettably it can only get on with its good work without the current distraction, etc.

I have some sympathy with this view, as I have with the view that Andrew Paulson is an untrustworthy buffoon. However, he is also an elected untrustworthy buffoon, and I am not at all happy with secretive, backstairs attempts to remove him that derive fundamentally from FIDE politicking (and for that matter, from people who I trust no more than I trust him).

[John Upham]

Clearly this is a critical period when a competant Press / PR Officer is badly required.

Do we know who is fulfilling this role?

[JustinHorton]

For example, I do take AP's point that Nigel's position is not analogous to that of a whistleblower

I thougbt Paulson's attempt to remove Short was pitiful and hypocritical, and in that sense he's brought it all on his own head. However, Short's own conduct has been far from acceptable either.

Both these individuals have been using the ECF to further their own political aims without reference to the membership or the proper purpose of the organisation.

[Gordon Cadden]

From CJ to AP. Out of the frying pan, into the fire ?

[JustinHorton]

From CJ to AP. Out of the frying pan, into the fire ?

If only anybody had made this point before the election!

[Nigel Short]

From CJ to AP. Out of the frying pan, into the fire ?

If only anybody had made this point before the election!

I did actually warn people about AP before the election, for which I was criticised by some people at the AGM.

[Jonathan Bryant]

Clearly this is a critical period when a competant Press ... is badly required.

Do we know who is fulfilling this role?

Indeed.

[John McKenna]

From CJ to AP. Out of the frying pan, into the fire ?

If only anybody had made this point before the election!

I agree with Justin's comments and appeals for sense to prevail rather than a bonfire of vanities.

Are Nigel & Andrew so at loggerheads that they cannot see the damage being done?

[Nigel Short]

Are Nigel & Andrew so at loggerheads that they cannot see the damage being done?[/quote]

Would you rather not know about the true nature of Andrew Paulson's relationship with Kirsan? Would you rather not know how this American interloper who, up until a couple of years ago, had no prior interest in or connection with chess in England, is using the ECF as a vehicle for his own (and indeed Kirsan's) international ambitions? If blissful ignorance is what you want, I am deeply sorry for having disturbed your peace. If, however, the hijacking of English chess for political ends by a foreigner is a matter of some importance to you, then I trust you will forgive me for the temporary turbulence.

[JustinHorton]

If, however, the hijacking of English chess for political ends by a foreigner is a matter of some importance to you

As indeed many people were concerned when English chess was hijacked by the CAS case, orchestrated by Nigel Short in support of Garry Kasparov (a foreigner, if we're making an issue of it) and deliberately hidden from ECF members and ECF Council by the FIDE Delegate.

Enough of this hypocrisy. Enough of Paulson and Nigel both.

[John McKenna]

Nigel, if all that you wrote above was not patently obvious at the start you have perhaps confirmed suspicions.
What do you suggest should be done now?