Discrimnintaion againts CFC members wihtout a Provicial Assocaition continues

[Pierre Dénommée]

Last year there was talk about giving all CFC members an equal vote, regardless of the situation of the province. A tiny amendment to the CFC Constitution would have done it: if a province has no Affiliated Provincial Association, the CFC members of this province shall vote on this board for the selection of their class A members.

I am not surprised to see that it has remained words, not deeds.

Our Constitution was made compliant, this was extremely important. Now that we are compliant, we should have modified the Constitution to suit our needs, not Ottawa's. We can do that risk free because if Ottawa refuses, the CFC we will not be disbanded. This was another talk not followed by deeds.

On Chess.ca, I see the obsolete CFC Constitution.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

Last year there was talk about giving all CFC members an equal vote, regardless of the situation of the province. A tiny amendment to the CFC Constitution would have done it: if a province has no Affiliated Provincial Association, the CFC members of this province shall vote on this board for the selection of their class A members.

I am not surprised to see that it has remained words, not deeds.

Our Constitution was made compliant, this was extremely important. Now that we are compliant, we should have modified the Constitution to suit our needs, not Ottawa's. We can do that risk free because if Ottawa refuses, the CFC we will not be disbanded. This was another talk not followed by deeds.

On Chess.ca, I see the obsolete CFC Constitution.

While I have always favoured a more democratic CFC I don't recall any talk about giving all CFC members an equal vote. If you could point to the thread where such talk was posted it would help refresh my memory. Given the fact that the continued existence of the CFC was very much up in the air at about this time last year, a status quo constitution was the only option that had any reasonable prospect of attaining the requisite majority among the then governors. As I recall you were urging the governors to reject the compromise reached and there was much doubt whether we would be able to get agreement before the deadline was reached. There was much confusion among the governors about the consequences of a rejection and I am pretty sure that the only way forward would have been for me to resign and give someone else a chance to ensure the CFC's survival because I would have been out of ideas at that point. Fortunately it did not go that way.

[Pierre Dénommée]

While I have always favoured a more democratic CFC I don't recall any talk about giving all CFC members an equal vote. If you could point to the thread where such talk was posted it would help refresh my memory. Given the fact that the continued existence of the CFC was very much up in the air at about this time last year, a status quo constitution was the only option that had any reasonable prospect of attaining the requisite majority among the then governors. As I recall you were urging the governors to reject the compromise reached and there was much doubt whether we would be able to get agreement before the deadline was reached. There was much confusion among the governors about the consequences of a rejection and I am pretty sure that the only way forward would have been for me to resign and give someone else a chance to ensure the CFC's survival because I would have been out of ideas at that point. Fortunately it did not go that way.


I disagree that the only solution that could have been successfully voted was the status quo. If the whole Executive has stood behind a new proposal, it could have passed. A lot of time has been lost between the first refusal by the Governors and the final acceptation of a poor Constitution aimed at satisfying Ottawa only. If we have worked relentlessly, every available day, toward the goal of a totally new Constitution that could advance our cause, we would have succeeded.

If you take a look at any other Constitution, you will notice that it has not been cut and pasted from Industry Canada web site. I am not surprised that the CFC is ashamed to put its True Constitution online in the Handbook. If anybody for any reason would sue the CFC, I am sure that this hiding of our Constitution would give us zero credibility. According to the Laws of Quebec, the Constitution is a contract between the CFC and its members, it cannot be hidden or misrepresented. The obsolete Constitution on our web site fails to comply with the non-profit Act. This is not a good publicity for us.

Interzonal Tournaments are mentioned at the end of the Handbook but those are obsolete. This shows how often this handbook has been updated.

I am considering standing for election in order to defend my ideas.

I will check old posts later.

[Erik Malmsten]

Last year there was talk about giving all CFC members an equal vote, regardless of the situation of the province. A tiny amendment to the CFC Constitution would have done it: if a province has no Affiliated Provincial Association, the CFC members of this province shall vote on this board for the selection of their class A members.

I am not surprised to see that it has remained words, not deeds.

Our Constitution was made compliant, this was extremely important. Now that we are compliant, we should have modified the Constitution to suit our needs, not Ottawa's. We can do that risk free because if Ottawa refuses, the CFC we will not be disbanded. This was another talk not followed by deeds.

On Chess.ca, I see the obsolete CFC Constitution.

I haven't been on this site for awhile, but I thought the CFC and FQE made peace. I would expect the FQE to be able to appoint CFC governors (A members) based on the numbers of FQE members, perhaps to have as many reps as Ontario. There are clearly the most active chess province in Canada and should be represented as so, not by a vote of a few who are CFC members.

[Pierre Dénommée]

The FQE is happy with only 3 Governors. Giving the FQE a number of Governors commensurate with its importance is an adequate solution.

No province can appoint CFC voting members. They are voted at the provincial AGM. The FQE AGM has always been too late for this procedure to be followed.