General Election

[Paul McKeown]

People,

I've already been doorstepped by election hopefuls and their agents, rather pointlessly as like the majority of the population I live in a safe seat, and anyway my mind was made up over 25 years ago.

However, I would like to give these canvassers something to think about. So can anyone think of some sensible questions, which might have some small beneficial impact on the main parties' cultural programmes (and hence on chess), should the questions filter up the hierarchies?

I remember seeing something that Ben Bradshaw said in the Guardian recently; he was in conversation with, I think, Ed Vaizey and Don Foster. Chess was mentioned, I think. Regrettably, although I saved the paper for reading later, I never did actually get around to it... can anyone help?

Regards,
Paul McKeown.

[Roger de Coverly]

So can anyone think of some sensible questions, which might have some small beneficial impact on the main parties' cultural programmes (and hence on chess), should the questions filter up the hierarchies?

You have a government which spends, or causes to be spent, large sums pursuing international sporting success in a wide range of both well known and little known physical sports and activities. Why does it neglect the mental ones, particularly where there is a past track record of being second only to the USSR?

[Rob Thompson]

You have a government which spends, or causes to be spent, large sums pursuing international sporting success in a wide range of both well known and little known physical sports and activities. Why does it neglect the mental ones, particularly where there is a past track record of being second only to the USSR?

because spending money on these mental "sports" doesn't win enough votes to make it worth while. Simple as that

[Matthew Turner]

Rob,
I don't know many people who will be voting Labour because of the current government's support for our Taekwondo Squad.

"The 20 members of the GB Academy, which receives funding from UK Sport, are all full-time athletes.

They train twice a day - about 26 hours a week - under the watchful eyes of head coach Nelson Miller and performance director Gary Hall, and travel all around the world to compete."

(I think the above report is somewhat out of date (2007) and I think we actually have 30+ professional Taekwondo athletes in the UK now)

Supporting chess would be both cheaper and gain more votes!

[Roger de Coverly]

little known physical sports and activities.

government's support for our Taekwondo Squad.

"The 20 members of the GB Academy, which receives funding from UK Sport, are all full-time athletes.

I had to use Google to find out what it was - Korean martial arts.

[Richard Bates]

The popularity or otherwise of Taekwondo isn't the issue - it is its status as an Olympic sport in which we have a chance of medals.

[Matthew Turner]

Richard,
Of course you are right, but it is very easy to say that chess doesn't get supported because it is not an Olympic Sport. I think there would be quite a bit of prestige to the government (country) in having a World (Junior) Chess Champion. Perhaps this would equate to an Olympic medallist in Taekwondo. However, take a look at the British Taekwondo Association website

http://www.britishtaekwondo.org.uk/

I cannot believe that the ECF could be that professional how ever much money they had.

[Arshad Ali]

The politicians have bigger fish to fry. But support for chess is also a double-edged sword. In prosperous times it might pass muster. But the whole world knows that savage and draconian spending cuts are in the offing over the next few years. It's a fiscal crisis both Labour and the Tories dare not fully acknowledge during the campaign and are carefully skirting around. Under such conditions to support chess means subsequently setting oneself up for attack: "In the face of unprecedented austerity, blah blah blah, the other party has gone and splurged on things like chess."

[Matthew Turner]

Arshad,
Politics is a funny old business. Chess has clear educational benefits (well most people think it does). England's Squad at the World Youth Championships will probably be roughly 50% male/female and there will probably be a good mix of ethnic backgrounds. A politician might get into trouble arguing against supporting that, especially given the relatively modest sums involved (compared to say their own expenses).

[Arshad Ali]

Arshad,
Politics is a funny old business. Chess has clear educational benefits (well most people think it does). England's Squad at the World Youth Championships will probably be roughly 50% male/female and there will probably be a good mix of ethnic backgrounds. A politician might get into trouble arguing against supporting that, especially given the relatively modest sums involved (compared to say their own expenses).

You're preaching to the choir. I concur that the educational and social benefits of chess have been unequivocally demonstrated. And the sums of money are, as you point out, not gargantuan. I'm just putting myself in the shoes of those pathetic and craven characters otherwise known as politicians.

[Paul McKeown]

Hmmm,

I'm a chess player and even I'm not convinced by the "chess is good for education" argument, which just sounds like some propaganda scared up to convince someone to put chess on a curriculum. That one needs supporting evidence; that and the circumstances under which chess provides developmental advantage and when it interferes. Et cetera.

Anyway, I don't think the chess authorities in the UK need more money from central government, nor do I think it that they would necessarily spend it entirely wisely.

I was thinking in terms of other policies. For instance:

a) recognition of chess as a sport or as least as some defined form of cultural activity; let government classify it, then other doors are opened automatically.
b) making time for it at schools - perhaps by pruning the burdensome national curriculum?
c) providing time and money for training for teachers at schools that wish to teach chess or run clubs
d) similarly providing time and money for training of leaders at scouts, etc., that wish to teach chess
e) simply recognising that it is an activity at which England has excelled in the recent past; even MP's talking about chess helps.

Can other people put meat on the bones of the four ideas above?
Are there other ideas?

[Neville Belinfante]

Two questions I have asked all the prospective parliamentary candidates in High Wycombe

If elected would you would be able to present the prizes at the UK chess challenge Buckinghamshire Megafinal which is on Sunday May 8th

Three have said yes, the fourth hasnt responded to my email yet.

Does your party have any policy about either Chess as a Sport or using Chess as a tool for Educational advancement? The English Chess Federation are involved with a project to provide Free Chess Sets to every school in the country which has DCMS support.

Of course the honest answer is not, but it has led to two of the candidates telling me they used to play chess when younger.

As the election is so close, if lots of candidates get chess related questions, it could make a difference

[Stewart Reuben]

One pertinent question particularly to ask Labour candidates is:
It was agreed about 3 years ago in Parliament that mind sports (such as bridge or chess) could be recognised for charitable purposes - not just junior chess.
Why has this never been implemented. It was agreed, is cost free to the government and would be valuable to mind sports.

Stewart Reuben

[Matt Mackenzie]

This is as good a place as any to note that the UKIP candidate in Bolton West will be familiar to many of you

[J T Melsom]

In the interests of political balance we should perhaps either list all the candidates for the above constituency or note that there are a 'number of fruitcakes' standing across the country.