+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 266

Thread: Sport England Funding

  1. #121
    Senior Member riposteinprime has a reputation beyond reputeriposteinprime has a reputation beyond reputeriposteinprime has a reputation beyond reputeriposteinprime has a reputation beyond reputeriposteinprime has a reputation beyond reputeriposteinprime has a reputation beyond reputeriposteinprime has a reputation beyond reputeriposteinprime has a reputation beyond reputeriposteinprime has a reputation beyond reputeriposteinprime has a reputation beyond reputeriposteinprime has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    467

    Default

    I suspect they're far too busy paying people to update facebook and twitter to actually talk to any club-owners.

  2. #122
    Senior Member munkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond repute munkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    826

    Default

    Well maybe too busy persuading UK Sport and Sport England to give them a massive pile of money and getting the new Board members whipped into shape. I'll give the benefit of the doubt.
    Sean Walton - the voice of reason!

    www.salleholyrood.com

  3. #123
    Senior Member Keith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    2,930

    Default

    Sean, I thought we voted for the directors to decide the policy and direction of BFA. If not, then it does not really matter who we vote for. Indeed, do we need a Board at all in that case?

    That said, it is good news about SE and UKS funding and we should hear by April what BFA is going to do with it. It would be good to know who actually negotiated for the two sets of funding.

    Far better to be able to discuss funding use than no funding scenario.

  4. #124
    Senior Member munkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond repute munkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    826

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Keith.A.Smith View Post
    Sean, I thought we voted for the directors to decide the policy and direction of BFA. If not, then it does not really matter who we vote for. Indeed, do we need a Board at all in that case?.
    Of course, Keith. Ably supported, guided and assisted by our Chair, CEO, PM and other professional staff.
    Sean Walton - the voice of reason!

    www.salleholyrood.com

  5. #125
    Senior Member Keith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    2,930

    Default

    I agree that clearly BFA must use the professional staff and their expertise. I am just getting at the point about who decides what in the coming months. I only ask for transparency, as both SE and UKS funding use will no doubt please some and upset others. The UKS funding is bound to be contentious in some areas.

    As I said before, it is great to have the funding and I look forward to seeing both a growth in our sport and greatly increased international success by 2016.

    I also ask who makes the real decisions, as we are due to have more elections to the Board in March or April and their importance depends on the real role and influence of directors.

  6. #126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Keith.A.Smith View Post
    Sean, I thought we voted for the directors to decide the policy and direction of BFA. If not, then it does not really matter who we vote for. Indeed, do we need a Board at all in that case?
    Keith,

    New Board members are clearly constrained by the circumstances they find left by the previous Board. I presume as a Board member you would know that that the applications to the funding bodies were under the jurisdiction of the previous Board.

    My experience so far on the Board reinforce the feeling that an efficient effective Board is essential to the good governance of BF and this something that we are all trying to re-establish at Board level. Any suggestion that the Board is irrelevant to the policy and direction of BF is very misguided, and certainly will not apply to the current Board even if this criticism could be levelled at the previous Board.

    Graham

  7. #127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by munkey View Post
    David Teasdale did say before the AGM that he wanted to speak to me about BF's Grow agenda but I'm still waiting for the call. Maybe the Executive have their own ideas.
    Sean
    I believe that David will try to call you this weekend,
    Graham

  8. #128
    Senior Member Keith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    2,930

    Default

    Graham, I am glad to hear it. The previous full Board did not agree the final submissions, but I guess the Executive decided to handle them.

    It is great we have been granted additional funding for at least one year and I am sure for the next four years.

    My point is that the funding submissions will have commitments from BFA and I imagine strict conditions.

    Is it possible for the membership to know what has been agreed by BFA? I appreciate this has not been done yet as time is short since the Board was briefed by SE and UKS.

    Clearly the relationship between the Board and the Executive is the crucial nexus for the future. However, if a plan has been agreed for the next four years, then I guess the Board will focus on other areas.

  9. #129
    Senior Member munkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond repute munkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    826

    Default

    I look forward to that, Graham.

    Personally, I think there are a couple of really important things coming up in the next year: the appointment of a new, permanent, full-time CEO (remember BF's "succession planning"?) and changes to the BF's Articles of Association to make it possible to appoint independent Board members to ensure that the Board has all the skills it needs. Am less excited about next set of Board elections although I am curious about who will stand for re-election.
    Sean Walton - the voice of reason!

    www.salleholyrood.com

  10. #130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Keith.A.Smith View Post
    Graham, I am glad to hear it. The previous full Board did not agree the final submissions, but I guess the Executive decided to handle them.

    It is great we have been granted additional funding for at least one year and I am sure for the next four years.

    My point is that the funding submissions will have commitments from BFA and I imagine strict conditions.

    Is it possible for the membership to know what has been agreed by BFA? I appreciate this has not been done yet as time is short since the Board was briefed by SE and UKS.

    Clearly the relationship between the Board and the Executive is the crucial nexus for the future. However, if a plan has been agreed for the next four years, then I guess the Board will focus on other areas.
    Keith,

    Re-building trust and confidence between the Board and the Executive is essential to BF’s future success. This is something we are all working towards.

    As regards the funding, there are planning issues to consider, and an announcement to the members will be made as soon as possible.

    As regards the future, it is naive to suppose that our funding agreement with the Sports Councils will prevent any further consideration or development of policy over the next 4 years. In addition the Board has accepted the Sports Council Audit criticism that BF lacked a long term strategy and is keen to look at the longer term. We are currently working on a program and strategy to cover the next 12 years. Again we will release more details as soon as possible.

    I am very encouraged and impressed by the enthusiasm and effort that my fellow Directors have already put into these goals. We have been given a chance by the Sports councils to develop both Grow, (participation), and Gold, (elite fencing), and we must succeed this time.

    Graham

  11. #131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by munkey View Post

    Personally, I think there are a couple of really important things coming up in the next year: the appointment of a new, permanent, full-time CEO (remember BF's "succession planning"?) and changes to the BF's Articles of Association to make it possible to appoint independent Board members to ensure that the Board has all the skills it needs. Am less excited about next set of Board elections although I am curious about who will stand for re-election.
    Sean,

    We do really need to have the correct ‘skills’ on the Board. We have already carried out a skills matrix of the current Board and will publish our ‘shortcomings’ with the notice of the coming election. It is then hoped that we be able to fill the vacancies with the required expertise. I think that this is very important, and could make the appointment of any extra un-elected directors less significant.

    Of course the appointment of a permanent CEO is vital to our future success.

    Graham

  12. #132
    Senior Member munkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond repute munkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    826

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by graham paul View Post
    Sean,

    We do really need to have the correct ‘skills’ on the Board. We have already carried out a skills matrix of the current Board and will publish our ‘shortcomings’ with the notice of the coming election. It is then hoped that we be able to fill the vacancies with the required expertise. I think that this is very important, and could make the appointment of any extra un-elected directors less significant.

    Of course the appointment of a permanent CEO is vital to our future success.

    Graham
    Good to hear. Sport England's catchily-titled "Things To Think About" tool makes it abundantly clear that any NGB that expects to continue to receive funding must not only have a Board with the requisite skills but also have a mechanism in place to appoint additional Board members if there are "shortcomings". Even with a "perfect" Board in place, with the democratic election process we have at the moment, there is no guarantee that you'll have a suitably expert Board forever. As members we should welcome the changes to how Board members can be appointed. Presumably another EGM will be required and I hope that the reasons for the proposed changes are far better presented than they were last time. I'm sure they will be.
    Last edited by munkey; -22nd December 2012 at 23:25. Reason: clarification
    Sean Walton - the voice of reason!

    www.salleholyrood.com

  13. #133
    Senior Member Keith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    2,930

    Default

    Thanks for this Graham. Presumably, it would also be possible to ask elected directors to stand down to allow the election or appointment of directors with the requisite skills that the current board has identified are lacking amongst themselves.

    Thanks also for bring so open in your communications. It is much appreciated. I think your openness is much appreciated.

  14. #134
    Senior Member munkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond repute munkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    826

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Keith.A.Smith View Post
    Thanks for this Graham. Presumably, it would also be possible to ask elected directors to stand down to allow the election or appointment of directors with the requisite skills that the current board has identified are lacking amongst themselves.
    Hmm. I doubt it. If there is a skills shortage on the board, you need to be able to bring in additional skills, not jettison the skills of the elected members you have. How would you decide who should stand down? Who would decide? And how could you guarantee that the next elected director would be better?
    Sean Walton - the voice of reason!

    www.salleholyrood.com

  15. #135
    Senior Member Keith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond reputeKeith.A.Smith has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    2,930

    Default

    My point was to endorse yours. If skills are the crucial factor to retaining funding and the sport as a whole wants that funding, maybe we will need to jettison some of the old ideas of allowing the membership to elect the Board and appoint more directors. Graham seemed to be suggesting appointing might not be needed if the "right" people were elected.

    I think the role of the Board as an overall policy making body had decreased anyway and we should all realise that the sport will inevitably be run by the Chair, CEO, PD and Grow Manager and their staff. They are all paid and have the time to give. The Board is and will probably become more of a supervisory body. Grow and Gold targets must have been agreed already to get the funding from SE and UKS.

    Different countries do it in different ways, but clearly our Board will need to follow instructions from UKS and SE.

    It will be interesting to see what additional skills the Board feels it needs and hopefully these can be found.

  16. #136

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by munkey View Post
    Hmm. I doubt it. If there is a skills shortage on the board, you need to be able to bring in additional skills, not jettison the skills of the elected members you have. How would you decide who should stand down? Who would decide? And how could you guarantee that the next elected director would be better?
    Sean,

    No decision has been made on the way forward by the Board yet, but we will be discussing the issues early in the New Year. However I agree with you, that requiring a Board member to resign to make way for someone with a different skill set is not very practical.

    The Sports Council Audit, which will be made available to members very soon, highlights 2 current failings in the governance of the Board. We need to have a mechanism to ensure the Board has the requisite skills set and we need a minimum of 25% ‘Independent’ Board membership.

    The Sports Council definition is-
    ‘Independent means someone who is free from any close connection to the NGB and who, from the perspective of an objective outsider, would be viewed as independent. Alongside a specific skill set or experience, these individuals should bring a dispassionate objectivity to the Board that a close connection to the NGB (e.g. active involvement in its affairs or a fiduciary interest) through regional or national representation or other interests cannot provide. Like all Board members, an independent should exercise his/her best judgement for the exclusive interest of the NGB and not operate with any vested interests. Often, but not always, independents will be non-members though they may also be members simply because they play the sport.'

    It may be that some of the current Board could be considered ‘Independent’, however there is another requirement in that the selection process must include ‘Open recruitment’ outside the Sport, meaning that the post has to be advertised externally. Hence currently on the Board only David Teasdale can be considered as independent. It is essential that this is rectified in the not too distant future. Whilst it is conceivable that the March election could result in the some more independent members on the Board, if the process was advertised externally and made open to non-members, we will ultimately have to have an EGM to modify the Articles. My view is that the Board must have the ability to appoint 2 extra members if it feels that the requirements are not being met. We will try to ensure that members are given all the information in a timely manner, so that an informed decision can be made.

    Graham

  17. #137
    Senior Member munkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond repute munkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    826

    Default

    These all looks like positive developments for BF governance. Will the new CEO also be on the Board and considered as independent?

    Thanks again Graham.
    Sean Walton - the voice of reason!

    www.salleholyrood.com

  18. #138

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by munkey View Post
    These all looks like positive developments for BF governance. Will the new CEO also be on the Board and considered as independent?

    Thanks again Graham.
    Sean
    The Sports council are quite specific that the CEO cannot be considered as independent.
    Graham

  19. #139
    Senior Member munkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond reputemunkey has a reputation beyond repute munkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    826

    Default

    Of course. I re-read the part of your last post about fiduciary interest and realised the CEO wouldn't fit the bill as an independent. So a new Board would have 8 elected members, an independent Chair and 2 directors appointed after open recruitment. What about William Pitt? Independent presumably but appointed how? Co-opted?
    Sean Walton - the voice of reason!

    www.salleholyrood.com

  20. #140

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by munkey View Post
    Of course. I re-read the part of your last post about fiduciary interest and realised the CEO wouldn't fit the bill as an independent. So a new Board would have 8 elected members, an independent Chair and 2 directors appointed after open recruitment. What about William Pitt? Independent presumably but appointed how? Co-opted?
    Sean.

    William Pitt was co-opted under the current articles. I do not believe that the Sports council would consider him as independent.

    As I mentioned earlier, my understanding is that if we advertised the March election outside fencing, then is conceivable that some of the new Directors could qualify as ‘Independent’, but this requires further investigation and would certainly depend on who is elected.

    Graham

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts