AGM

[StevieHilton]

I have given you an answer why do you accept it?

[Ianbrownlee]

Does the motion actually have any effect to non-Fide rated tournaments in Scotland? My understanding is that it does not and Stevie Hilton is in the process of altering the wording to clarify that the motion is only a guide and is not enforceable. Have I got that right?

Robin has asked this question several times without getting a yes/no answer. Are non-fide events affected yes or no? simple enough question

Let me ask another question, apart from division 1 of the SNCL what FIDE events are there in Scotland

Finally what events in Scotland are non-fide but are run by Chess Scotland therefore could be affected by this. Specifically I am thinking about provision and allocation of carers and wheelchair access.

I think that these questions must be clarified before the AGM as for example the Lanarkshire Chess league rep has to take advice from our members on how to vote. If wheelchair access is in the mix then we may have to decide on the definition of wheelchair access and the 3m rule. I can honestly see congresses under threat because of this simply because it may become unworkable.

[StevieHilton]

Does the motion actually have any effect to non-Fide rated tournaments in Scotland? My understanding is that it does not and Stevie Hilton is in the process of altering the wording to clarify that the motion is only a guide and is not enforceable. Have I got that right?[/quote
]
Robin has asked this question several times without getting a yes/no answer. Are non-fide events affected yes or no? simple enough question

Let me ask another question, apart from division 1 of the SNCL what FIDE events are there in Scotland

Finally what events in Scotland are non-fide but are run by Chess Scotland therefore could be affected by this. Specifically I am thinking about provision and allocation of carers and wheelchair access.

I think that these questions must be clarified before the AGM as for example the Lanarkshire Chess league rep has to take advice from our members on how to vote. If wheelchair access is in the mix then we may have to decide on the definition of wheelchair access and the 3m rule. I can honestly see congresses under threat because of this simply because it may become unworkable.

Ian,
I have said repeatedly that it is up to Chess Scotland to take this decision. It is not up to me as an individual to make that decision but Chess Scotland. It is pretty clear to me that at this moment the guidelines apply to FIDE rated tournaments only. As regards non FIDE rated events, it is up to CS to decide if they wish to add these guidelines. I have also made it clear I have no objection to the motion being modified so it can be applied to Non Fide rated events held here.
The purpose of the motion is to formalise the practice that already takes place.

[George Murphy]

Robin/Ian

The first line of Motion 1 reads:

‘1.1 Implementation of Guidelines from FIDE for Tournaments in which Disabled Players Participate

1. These requirements shall be used for all chess competitions.’

So, no distinction is drawn here between FIDE and non-FIDE rated Tournaments.

Then, at 10:32 PM on 12 August, Andy (H) wrote ‘these recommendations are to be enforced in FIDE rated Tournaments, but they cannot be forced onto Leagues and Congresses - (only) for Chess Scotland events’. Andy’s statement indicated there was a distinction between FIDE and non-FIDE rated events.. Together with doubt about the real meaning of certain words - ‘must’, ‘shall’ ‘should’ - some organisers were - quite rightly - concerned about the extent of the possible implications and sought clarification. Now, we seem to have it thanks to Andy’s latest news that the Guidelines are enforceable only in relation to FIDE rated Tournaments.

This should give organisers of non-FIDE rated Tournaments scope to continue and extend existing practice in relation to disabled players without having the Sword of Damocles hanging over them.

The simplest way to give effect to the new Guidelines is to introduce them in a Preamble or, alternatively, to amend the first line of Motion 1 to read something along the lines of:

1.1 In accordance with newly implemented FIDE Guidelines, the following provisions will be enforced in FIDE rated Tournaments in which Disabled Players participate in Scotland

1. These requirements shall be enforced only in FIDE rated Tournaments organised by, or under the auspices of Chess Scotland etc.etc.

2. Though not enforceable in non-FIDE rated Tournaments, organisers of all chess events in Scotland are urged to do their utmost to accommodate and encourage the participation of disabled chess players by adopting these FIDE guidelines wherever possible or practical. The overriding principle is one of inclusiveness towards all chess players.


Obviously,the above will need to be examined with a fine tooth comb to ensure that I have covered all the bases correctly.

[StevieHilton]

Robin/Ian

The first line of Motion 1 reads:

‘1.1 Implementation of Guidelines from FIDE for Tournaments in which Disabled Players Participate

1. These requirements shall be used for all chess competitions.’

So, no distinction is drawn here between FIDE and non-FIDE rated Tournaments.

Then, at 10:32 PM on 12 August, Andy (H) wrote ‘these recommendations are to be enforced in FIDE rated Tournaments, but they cannot be forced onto Leagues and Congresses - (only) for Chess Scotland events’. Andy’s statement indicated there was a distinction between FIDE and non-FIDE rated events.. Together with doubt about the real meaning of certain words - ‘must’, ‘shall’ ‘should’ - some organisers were - quite rightly - concerned about the extent of the possible implications and sought clarification. Now, we seem to have it thanks to Andy’s latest news that the Guidelines are enforceable only in relation to FIDE rated Tournaments.

This should give organisers of non-FIDE rated Tournaments scope to continue and extend existing practice in relation to disabled players without having the Sword of Damocles hanging over them.

The simplest way to give effect to the new Guidelines is to introduce them in a Preamble or, alternatively, to amend the first line of Motion 1 to read something along the lines of:

1.1 In accordance with newly implemented FIDE Guidelines, the following provisions will be enforced in FIDE rated Tournaments in which Disabled Players participate in Scotland

1. These requirements shall be enforced only in FIDE rated Tournaments organised by, or under the auspices of Chess Scotland etc.etc.

2. Though not enforceable in non-FIDE rated Tournaments, organisers of all chess events in Scotland are urged to do their utmost to accommodate and encourage the participation of disabled chess players by adopting these FIDE guidelines wherever possible or practical. The overriding principle is one of inclusiveness towards all chess players.


Obviously,the above will need to be examined with a fine tooth comb to ensure that I have covered all the bases correctly.

I agree with this George. I have consistently said that I do not have a problem with adapting the guidelines to suit local circumstances

[Adam Bremner]

A lot of interest in this motion!

Can I just get something clarified Steve, ideally with a straight yes or no. If the motion goes through, would Edinburgh Chess Club be able to use their premises to hold open events such as Winter Chess (lower sections) and the Elite Armageddon?

If yes, then great. If no, then surely you can appreciate a word change from must to should. These events can only take place because the venue is privately owned, and the hosting of them is in the interest of all chess players in Scotland. I am sure you wouldn't want these events to fold, especially when there has never been an issue in the past regarding access. Perhaps the way round it is that any new venues going forward must comply, but existing venues should be allowed to continue under the proviso they make every reasonable effort to accommodate disabled players, as is currently the case.

Adam,
There is nothing to stop Edinburgh CC holding these events, but unless alternative supervised accommodation is found for those who need it then it cannot be FIDE rated.

Thanks for replying Steve. OK and in the case of CS rated events, when you say it is up to CS to decide, does that mean that (1) they decide on passing motion 1 which would in turn prohibit CS rated events under the same conditions, OR (2) that they would decide after motion 1 was passed in a separate decision, which in turn implies motion 1 does not in itself prohibit these events. I think that is the bit that myself (and possibly Robin) is getting at.

[StevieHilton]

Adam,
I am not against the motion be adapted or altered to suit local situation
Any suggestions send them in as ammendments

[Adam Bremner]

I understand Steve, and I'm happy you are agreeable to amendments.

However, as it stands, when you say it is up to CS to decide if CS rated events could be held in these venues, do you mean:

(1) The decision to pass the motion as it stands, which in turn prohibits or allows the events
(2) The decision to amend the motion, so if passed would explicitly state if such events could happen
(3) A decision made after the motion is passed, to determine if these events could be held

That is where I'm getting confused

[robin moore]

I will try again to the elusive Mr Hilton....

Stevie, If it's a non -Fide event played in Scotland, is your motion (if passed) enforceable?

I may as well try again.....

Stevie, Yes or no?

[robin moore]

In fact let's make it easier....

To the seconder of this motion, Andy Howie, is this motion (if passed ) enforceable?