SOUTH AFRICAN JUNIOR
CHESS ASSOCIATION
OFFICIAL JUNIOR CHESS BODY OF CHESSA
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
COMMENTS PAGE
JUNE
APRIL / MAY / JUNE
POST YOUR COMMENTS TO SAJCA@SAJCA.COM
SAJCA INVOKES CLAUSE 11.8 OF THE CHESSA CONSTITUTION
DETAILS
Disclaimer
The material published on this web page contains the views and opinions of participants in this open discussion on the state of chess in South Africa and does not by virtue of publication reflect the views and opinions of SAJCA15/07/2007
Hi All,
Ralie has pointed out that the deadline for submissions and comments on the interim CHESSA "Code of Conduct " is today.
I would strongly suggest that all regions as well as SAJCA apply to CHESSA for a for a postponement of the date for this Code of Conduct to come into force. This document is nothing but a gagging order and gives CHESSA supreme power and it's members nothing.
I strongly suggest that the motive and haste to put this Code of Conduct into force has ill intent and is certainly not fair at all.
I also strongly challenge the voting process used at the CHESSA council meeting in April to be valid and should be challenged.
At the time there was a perfectly good "Code of Conduct" in place and no need to try and force this onto the regions.
This "Code of Conduct" must be out rightly rejected by all regions and CHESSA members unless you want your rights severely restricted and denied.
A document like this should be negotiated and drawn up by competent, experienced people that are neutral and do not have a hidden motive.
I ASK ALL REGIONS AND INTERESTED PARTIES TO PLEASE REJECT THIS CODE OF CONDUCT IN WRITING and to force CHESSA to "NEGOTIATE" things like this that effect the rights of their members.
I ask SAJCA to urgently publish and send this letter to all regions, and to lodge a formal rejection of this document with CHESSA urgently.Regards
Brian Aitchison
Chairman Gauteng Juniors (West)
15,06/2007
I am a little concerned as this is D-day for objections to the "new" Code of Conduct.
Do we worry about this or will it be postponed because of the chaos in chess?
Can Mark and Brian apply to Chessa for a postponement?
Regards,
Ralie Roos
14/06/2007
Hi!
It is truly shocking to see so few members from GS, in particular. BP has, after many, many requests, shown me a photocopied cheque sent to CHESSA allegedly to cover membership. I say allegedly as this is the same cheque BP handed over to the CHESSA treasurer so why is there a bank pay-in slip attached too?
It is for ZAR 4,200.00. Even allowing for just seniors, which I doubt it was, GS should show 42 members! Gunther at CHESSA states these figures are all up to date so what is going on? I am awaiting a reply from Gunther to see if he knows what is going on.
Can anyone else tell mean what GS would be paying CHESSA for aside from membership?
If one goes to the marvelous BP inspired web site, (www.johannesburgchess.org.za), one will see that there were supposed to be two tournaments at GS recently. One clashed with the S.A. Ladies’ Open & one was supposed to be at the end of May. Neither took place & neither were advertised outside of the web site, (http://www.johannesburgchess.org.za/tournaments.htm).
We just don’t play any tournaments in GS’s region. Does a union getting various fundings have to hold a certain amount of tournaments per annum? Several players are complaining that their ratings are going down as they don’t play in enough rated tournaments, (not all parents can travel the highways & byways to play in rated tournaments).
A technical question: when should one expect to see the results from the Bloem. inter-provincial, (held towards the end of May), counted in the various ratings?
Thanks & Regards,
MICHAEL BURKE
10 June 2007
Attention: Mr T. Reddy
Dear Mr Reddy
With reference to the email sent to you by the ex President of Chessa, Mr Laurence Ball, on the 8th of June 2007, subject; re: Letter of Concern. We are deeply disturbed by the number of untruths and mis leading information that has been fed to you.
We have consulted a number of unions and parents on this issue and there feedback is incorporated in this response.
We have copied the email from Mr Ball below and the collective responses are in red:
Thank you for your email dated 23/5/2007 – we, unfortunately do not have a copy of this email.
The matter has been investigated and I would like to report the following:
It is incorrect to state that there was no selection criteria available or publicised. It was announced at the CJCC that the number of players selected to participate Internationally had been reduced from 3 to 2 and that the RSA Champion would automatically be one of the participants.
- There was no selection criteria made available, to anyone, from Chessa. The only Selection Criteria that was publicised was the SAJCA (South African Junior Chess Association) selection criteria which has been in force since December 2003. These criteria have been amended on an annual basis at the SAJCA AGM in order to ensure that it is a working and living document. At no stage have any of the players, regions or council members been informed that this document is no longer in operation.
- Mr Parkin, at the opening ceremony of the National tournament (CJCC) announced categorically that only 1 player, the National Champion, would be going to the World Youth Chess Championships in 2007. He further said that the 2nd player could possibly go to another International tournament but that nothing had as yet been finalised.
- How can Chessa, who claim to have the best interests of the junior players at heart, change the goal posts at the start of the National Championships without any consultation with the National Council or the 18 Regions participating in the event.
- We (SAJCA as well as the Regions and all the parents who were in an uproar about this decision) were told that it was a SASCOC and government decision and definitely not a Chessa one.
- In Mr Ball’s letter he states that this decision was taken by the members of the Youth Committee, however, this Committee was only formed after the National Tournament had started – so this is really not possible!
Prior to the Junior Closed, on 2/3/2007 an email with more details of the selection criteria was sent to the Regions by one of the (interim) Youth Committee, Mr P McAvoy. This criteria was agreed upon at a meeting between P McAvoy, T Theunissen (both Youth Committee) B Parkin and myself (both CHESSA). In a nutshell, it stated that the winner of the CHESSA Junior Chess Championship (CJCC) would represent South Africa (RSA). It was also stated that a second person would be selected and that strong consideration would be given to results in the CJCC and the Junior Closed. The email that Mr Ball refers to, as having been sent out on 2/3/2007, was in fact only circulated to Regions on the 22nd of March and was a technical discussion document, not specific selection criteria, based on the workings and operations of the proposed Youth Committee. At no stage was/has this document accepted. In fact the earliest that it could have been accepted would have been at the April Council Meeting where it was tabled but not accepted.
- We feel it our duty to point out, the Junior Closed that is referred to, took place from the 30 of March to the 3rd of April 2007 which means that our players participated without any clear guidelines or criteria. Only in the latter part of the tournament, after numerous complaints from both players and parents, was a “selection criteria” displayed. This criteria was never circulated or presented for ratification. A number of regions are still unaware of the contents of these criteria.
- This selection criteria was not even circulated to all members of the Youth Committee for consultation.
The criteria for the African Junior and the U16 Olympiad players was different, but is not relevant here.
- The U16 Olympiad takes place from the 4th of August. To date, neither the team nor the manager/coach has been announced and travel arrangements have been made. This team should be leaving in about 6½ weeks time.
Other than the number of players going overseas being changed from 3 to 2, the criteria changed very little.
- We have a problem commenting on this point, because we are still waiting to see the selection critieria.
No mention was made of it being compulsory for players to participate the Junior Closed. There were two reasons for this:
Firstly, for some players at University it would be impossible for them to participate due to varsity commitments.
- Some players, in the past, have also had school commitments – if one is committed to playing in the National Championships, a player must make the choice, and make alternative arrangements with either the school or the university as has been done in the past.
Secondly, it seems absurd that the winner of the CJCC must play at the Junior Closed, can get 0 points at this tournament - but will still automatically be selected because he/she is the RSA Champion! There is no
motivation for the champion to do well and also leaves open the possibility of "tanking" a game to let his/her friend have a better chance of qualifying.
- The reason for the winner having to play in the Closed, was to maintain high standards and strengths at the Junior Closed. This allowed us to measure the 2nd and 3rd place player against the strongest possible opposition, in order to select the strongest team possible to go overseas. In all probability the number 1 player would knock out some of the weaker players and without the number 1 player, some of the weaker players could still get through, thereby weakening the team.
- Chessa (only certain Executive members) should not be allowed to arbitrarily amend or change any criteria without consultation.
- We must also point out, that the results of the Junior Closed are also used to select players for other International participation. If the National champion is not participating at the Closed they will not be eligible for the other International Tournaments.
Another problem that manifested itself from the previous criteria was that it was also compulsory for a player to participate in the CJCC. Again, this was a problem for University students as the CJCC clashed with the SASSU Championships. Last year CHESSA replaced one of the proposed female players for the African Junior (held in Botswana in December) with the winner of the SASSU tournament.
- In the past, if a player was unable to play in the National Tournament they could apply by means of a wildcard entry to participate in the Closed. The player referred to above did not do this and, therefore, was not considered because she did not meet the SAJCA selection criteria.
- This is the first time that Chessa has not ratified a player who qualified according to the selection criteria.
- The player that SAJCA selected, Daleen Wiid, was announced at the prize giving of the Closed in 2006 and by virtue of her selection would qualify for S.A. colours.
- By Chessa arbitrarily removing her from the team, they stripped her of her colours, which resulted in a legal response from her parents.
- The SASSU player that replaced Daleen Wiid, is a personal student of Mr Ball.
A male student who had represented RSA at every level from u10 was also omitted from the same tournament by SAJCA because he had only played 4 rounds of the Junior Closed and had to leave due to exams.
- This is not true, as the student referred to is Dewaldt Niemandt and he participated in the World U20 tournament as well as at the African Juniors. The World Youth Chess Championships only goes up to U18 – the U20’s go to a different tournament every year.
- The winner of the Junior closed in 2005 was Heinrich Stander – as the winner he is automatically selected to participate in the African Juniors. Chessa refused to allow him to go – Mr Ball’s reasoning was that Heinrich had won the tournament the previous year and therefore did not need to go again. A player plays and qualifies to be selected for the National Team according to the selection criteria; it is up to the player to decide whether he accepts the invitation to play and not up to the officials. What Mr Ball failed to realise was that if Heinrich were to win the tournament for the 2nd time, he would automatically be the winner of the Africa Zone and be invited to the World Junior U20 Chess Championships with all accommodation and entry costs paid for by the organisers - the value of that is about R15 000-00. Heinrich’s parents sought legal advice and also approached the Minister of Sport. Only after intervention from the Minister was Mr Ball’s decision over turned.
Clearly the previous criteria needed fine tuning.
- As stated earlier the SAJCA selection criteria is a living working document and is amended if necessary at the SAJCA AGM, after consultation with its members.
Following the completion of the Junior Closed the Youth Committee was tasked to submit its selection for the positions available. It should be mentioned that the Youth Committe consists of members of NACOC, SASSU and SAJCA (South African Junior Chess Association) and we believe that this Body will be the future of RSA Chess. A comprehensive selection doucument was submitted to CHESSA with the relevant recommendations. In terms of the CHESSA Constitution, all selections are sent to CHESSA for approval. Effectively many selections are ratified but changes have in the past been made, particularly concerning the representivity of our teams. A few changes were made to the Youth Committee selections by the CHESSA Executive.
- The interim Youth Committee that Mr Ball refers to, was formed in December at the Youth Summit, to investigate and report back to the April Council Meeting on the way forward for Junior Chess in South Africa.
- This committee was a FACT FINDING COMMITTEE ONLY and not mandated to run the affairs of any of the abovementioned bodies.
- The Junior Closed was and always has been the responsibility of SAJCA. Why then, with no experience, nor the Committee being formalized where they given the task of organising the most prestigious Junior National Tournament in South Africa. In previous years, SAJCA organised the event with overwhelming comments that it was the best run tournament ever.
- As previously mentioned, this Committee, was formed to prepare a discussion document ONLY, on the way forward for the juniors in our country and, therefore, had full support from all Junior Bodies. Chessa in its wisdom decided to award the running of the Closed to this body without any consultation. To date this body has not been ratified by the Chessa Council and even the discussion document was not accepted.
It is an unfortunate fact of life that there will always be a few players that are very difficult to seperate when it comes to selecting one of them for a National squad. There were two sets of players that were
particularly difficult to finalise, and Lisa Crouse and Sonja Scholtz was one of them. The Youth Committee sugggested Sonja Scholtz be selected and the CHESSA Executive voted to ratify the selection.
- If Chessa had not arbitrarily changed the number of players from 3 to 1, this problem would not exist.
I phoned Monique Botha's mother and asked her if Monique would be representing RSA this year. Mrs Botha advised me that she did not know as she was not sure if the family could afford it. The manager of the RSA
Team will work out the costs involved and will let the family know as soon as possible. It would appear likely to me that if Monique is unable to travel that Lisa would be selected to replace her.It is of great concern to me that there is a perception that CHESSA does not show concern or respect to its Junior players and parents.
- It is not a perception, it is a fact, if we are to look at the way that the Wiid, Stander, Crouse and Ramsarrup families have been mis-treated, and the way our players, parents and administrators are mis-lead. It is a clear indication that there is absolutely no consideration or respect shown for our Juniors.
The Youth Committee is a new structure which has not yet been formalised by the National Council. I do apologise to Mr and Mrs Crouse if there were some problems with communication with this Body, the Youth Committee Chairman will be given a copy of this email. I am sure that matters will improve.
- Mr & Mrs Crouse, at no stage, corresponded with the Youth Committee. Their correspondence was directed to Chessa without any success or formal feedback until now, which is some 2 months later.
- The Youth Committee only existed until the April Council Meeting, where they had to present their discussion document, whereupon they ceased to exist, so how can anyone correspond with them?
- It must be noted that the parents carry the majority of the costs of their children participating in International events.
Mr Parkin has forwarded me a copy of the letter that he faxed to Mr and Mrs Crouse on the 23/5/2007 and copied to the President of EP Chess. Mr Parkin apologised for the time it had taken for him to respond and explained the reasons for the delay.
- We are in possession of a copy of the above mentioned fax in which Mr Parkin goes to great lengths in trying to explain how busy he was.
- This document once again, is filled with a number of untruths, lies and mis-leading facts to try and placate the Crouse family.
- According to this letter, after discussions held with the Department of Sport and Recreation, Mr Tubby Reddy of SASCOC, Mr Parkin and Mr Ball with regards to selection and the cheapening of colours, Ball and Parkin claimed that they were instructed by SASCOC to reduce the size of the teams going overseas.
- In fact they categorically stated, at the opening ceremony of the National Tournament (in front of about 1000 players and about 500 parents) as well as at the Youth Summit, that this was an instruction from SASCOC.
- When the Government Representative, Mr Greg Fredericks, was questioned at the Youth Summit, Mr Ball quickly changed his words and said it was a Chessa decision.
- Mr Parkin makes reference to the ability to pay and favouritism in the past and that players were omitted from the team who were unable to pay. This is blatant lie, as in the past SAJCA has partially and fully assisted players that were unable to pay the full fee. Players have always been selected based purely on the SAJCA selection criteria, regardless of their financial means. If they were unable to pay and we were unable to raise funds for them, they voluntarily withdrew and the next player, up to a point, was included in the squad.
There is certainly some confusion in Junior Chess in our country at the moment. In our opinion a small minority from SAJCA are waging some kind of power struggle in order to have Junior Chess as it was previously.
- There is no power struggle; all we want is an effective and working Executive without bias and/or favouritism and full accountability who has the absolute best interest of all the chess players in South Africa at heart and not just a select few.
- There are numerous issues, e.g. very dubious financial statements, numerous complaints from parents, arbitrary decisions taken by certain Chessa Executive members, a lack of consultation, a major lack of transparency, poor governance, very poor accountability, no communication to name but a few, which led to the tabling of a vote of no confidence in the ex President, Mr Ball and the ex Executive Director, Mr Parkin.
- All of this can be seen on the SAJCA website – http://www.sajca.com/Comments.html
CHESSA is committed to restructuring Junior Chess - with SAJCA an element within it - to comply with the SASCOC model.
- SAJCA is totally 100% committed to and fully recognises Chessa as the mother body of chess in South Africa and like all the other chess bodies, i.e. the Woman’s Association, the Arbiters Association, the Trainers Association etc. we believe that each body has its niche within the Chessa Council.
- It is clear from this letter that Chessa is still trying to pull the wool over everyone’s eyes with blatant impunity. The fact that SASCOC has stated that they still recognise the current Chessa Exco (from our understanding this is only until they have been formally informed by Chessa), does not alter the situation at all. Mr Ball and Mr Parkin are the only people playing power games on this Chess Board and while they remain there, Chessa’s intentions cannot be trusted.
We do understand that some parents are concerned over the issue of Junior Colours and these issues will be addressed.
- If Mr Parkin’s reply to the Crouse family is indicative of the way in which issues will be addressed, we have a serious problem!
Mr Reddy, should you require any further information or clarity about anything that we have stated, please feel free to contact us (SAJCA) directly.
Regards
Mark C. January
Cell: 083 9555 679
sajca@sajca.com
09/06/2007
The sorry saga is now truly entrenched and chess in SA continue to be the loser.
It is time for all the stakeholders of SA Chess - senior chess, junior chess, school chess, ladies chess, arbiters, coaches, administrators, etc to hold a 'bosberaad' under the auspices of SASCOC in order to for all to understand what SASCOC requires of SA Chess, and to then work out plans to move SA Chess forward. This may mean wholesale change, or it may not, but at least they must look after the interest of chess and its followers.
Many of us parents have invested much money in chess for our children and to be subjected to some extremely poor decisions at the 2006 SA Junior Chess Nationals as well as a very poorly organised (putting it mildly) SA Junior Closed, no communications - not even a newsletter from Chessa, but I have to pay annual fees to them! is not acceptable.
For the benefit of chess in SA, please Mr. Ball and Mr. Parkin, step down and let chess in SA move forward.
Another concerned parent
08/06/2007
Hello Madeleine,
I notice you have just deleted my message, sent on 18 March 2007 without reading it. This was notifying you that the items Gauteng West requested to be added to the CHESSA Meeting Agenda, were still not added. When I asked you about it, you denied receiving any message.
All this does is make more doubt about the CHESSA executive, if the chess community cannot even trust what people say or do. Perhaps it was missed out by mistake on your behalf, but it is amazing that after being sent twice and hand delivered to Bernie, the items were still not added to the agenda - no co-incidence that the message has suddenly now been deleted - proof attached.
Regards
Lynne van Rensburg
Gauteng Junior Chess Secretary
05/06/2007
I would like to applaud both SAJCA and Gauteng West for the important stand that they have taken, as well as their valiant efforts in trying to rid our Chess community of the people that have been stifling the progress of chess in the country, particularly in the junior community.
My child has been involved with chess for the past 6 years and until last year we were always well informed about what was happening and everything was always done extremely professionally, particularly around communication, tournament organisation and overseas participation. Unfortunately, due to the power struggles and money hungry individuals this year appears to be a non starter. The National tournament last year was a disaster, not to mention the fiasco of the shoddily run Junior Closed this year. As far as I am aware, teams will shortly be participating internationally and to date no information has been forth coming – what is going on????
It’s time for Mr Ball & Mr Parkin to put their pride in their pockets, pack their bags and leave. Once they’ve gone, SAJCA can return to doing what they do best, taking care of our children, which they have done so admirably in the past.
I implore other parents to please come forward and make their points of view known, it is imperative that you (the other parents and players) come forward and show your support to the organisations that are trying to improve chess in our country.
To SAJCA and Gauteng West – please keep up the good work, its greatly appreciated and we desperately need people like you.
Worried Parent
Gauteng North
04/06/2007
Hello,
We have looked at the draft CHESSA financial statements that were produced at the CHESSA council meeting held on the 14 April for approval by the Council and have made some observations. Perhaps some of you could answer some of the queries of funds that were approved.
Please note that NO questions relating to the financials were allowed to be asked at the CHESSA council meeting, hence we are asking them now. We are entitled to transparently and accountability if not clear on some of the figures or decisions made.
We would like to ask following:
1) Lotto project:
a) Why in 2006 were some regions (EK, GS, and MH) given bank funds of R37,000 (more than 50% extra) for Lotto projects when the Executive Directors Report stated that regions received R30,000 (R22,000 bank funds and R8,000 equipment), and other regions given less than R22,000 bank funds?
b) How was the money allocated?
c) Were LOTTO allocations approved by the council and if so are these minuted?
d) Should the LOTTO allocations per region not be according to contributions re number of registered players, number of rated tournaments, player strength, (results achieved as well as rating statistics), involvement in organizing tournaments at national level etc. pro rata with the effort being put into develop chess further in the country?
e) Could the LOTTO development reports for ALL regions please be added as an addendum to the financial statements and distributed to the whole council. Some regions have been unfairly accused of mismanagement of funds yet others have not even handed in any reports at all. All council members are entitled to see reports for all other regions, as this is not solely for the CHESSA executive to approve.
f) Please note that the R22,000 Lotto funds given to GW was spent and allocated with a full report accounting for funds spent.
g) Why were only certain regions allocated LOTTO funds in 2005?
2) SRSA Project
(Sport RSA – Department of Sport South Africa government fund)a) The R25,000 given to GW from the Department of Sport was returned, as it was not spent by the due date (Sept 2006). This was never explained to the GW committee (only individually by the CHESSA Executive Director to the previous GW chairman), and therefore the GW committee have fairly returned the funds before the council meeting on 14 April, although the forecast development project was to run until May 2007.
b) Were the R75,000 and R50,000 government funds for OFS and WP applied for? Please could the SRSA (Dept of Sport government fund) project reports for ALL regions be added as an addendum to the FY2006 financial statements.
c) Did Limpopo not receive any funding (not shown in financials)? If so reporting is inaccurate or misleading. If not, why not?
A Lotto Project: Distribution
2006
2005
Total Lotto
SRSA Project
Total 2 YR
(government fund - Dept of sport)
R 387,750
R 158,307
R 546,057
R 250,000
R 796,057
% of total
OFS
R 25,000
R 25,000
R 75,000
R 100,000
12.18%
Ekuruleni
R 37,000
R 8,000
R 45,000
R 25,000
R 70,000
8.53%
Gauteng South
R 37,000
R 8,000
R 45,000
R 25,000
R 70,000
8.53%
Gauteng North
R 27,000
R 18,000
R 45,000
R 25,000
R 70,000
8.53%
MP Highveld
R 37,000
R 30,000
R 67,000
R 67,000
8.16%
Western Province
R 15,000
R 15,000
R 50,000
R 65,000
7.92%
Northern Province
R 10,000
R 20,000
R 30,000
R 25,000
R 55,000
6.70%
Mid Gauteng
R 22,000
R 8,000
R 30,000
R 30,000
3.65%
Northern Cape
R 22,000
R 8,000
R 30,000
R 30,000
3.65%
Eastern Province
R 10,000
R 20,000
R 30,000
R 30,000
3.65%
Boland
R 27,000
R 27,000
R 27,000
3.29%
SWD
R 27,000
R 27,000
R 27,000
3.29%
Gauteng West
R 22,000
R 22,000
R 22,000
2.68%
North West
R 11,000
R 8,000
R 19,000
R 19,000
2.31%
SA Braille
R 18,000
R 18,000
R 18,000
2.19%
Eastern Cape
R 15,000
R 15,000
R 15,000
1.83%
MP Lowveld
R 15,000
R 15,000
R 15,000
1.83%
Sedibeng
R 15,000
R 15,000
R 15,000
1.83%
Platina
R 11,000
R 11,000
R 11,000
1.34%
KZN
R 8,000
R 8,000
R 8,000
0.97%
Limpopo
Lotto Admin - Emilia
R 2,750
R 4,307
R 7,057
R 7,057
0.86%
SAAA
R 5,000
R 5,000
0.61%
SASSU
R 5,000
R 5,000
0.61%
GW - PDI's for CJCC06
R 15,000
R 15,000
1.83%
Bridging finance OFS (returned by GW)
R 25,000
R 25,000
3.04%
Subtotal for region (2 year)
R 387,750
R 158,307
R 546,057
R 275,000
R 821,057
100.00%
Lusaka - Lotto subs
R 5,481
Watu Kobese
R 2,681
K Sollomon
R 1,400
D vd Heever
R 1,400
Special Projects
R 43,993
Coaching - Boland
R 1,134
Hungary medals K solomon
R 7,500
WP Dev (Train teachers)
R 5,000
Watu Kobese
R 5,359
Additional coach Olympiad team (Mabusela)
R 25,000
Purchase of Electronic Clocks
R 130,351
Total
R 567,575
R 158,307
R 725,882
R 275,000
R 1,000,882
3) Other –
relating to Expenditure on Page 9 of Statements of Receipts and Payments
(Given out at the Council meeting)a) Although the Juniors represent 85% of the CHESSA members, and contribute pro rata via CHESSA fees, of the R1,132,681 spent, why was NO money allocated to international junior participation, when R97,889 was allocated for the Senior Olympiad 2006 and R43,000 allocated to Ladies team for HPC Project 2006? SEEMS THERE IS DEFINITE BIAS HERE! International participation is part of development of South African Chess, as we are still way behind in world standards, and the future is with the top SA youth, as well as the top SA players. Should funding not be shared?
b) From the draft statements produced at the council meeting, what is the special claim of R10,000 for WP?
c) Could all the regions not make use of the training manual of R5,000 paid to
L. Bouah?d) Could the telephone costs of R37,751 (average of R3,146 per month) not be reduced to save expenses when many people have email? Is there any evidence of these calls, as it is policy to attach proof of payment to all expenses claimed.
We would like to repeat that many of the above questions are just queries and surely have valid answers, but we would like more details where certain information is vague and not specified.
Regards
Gauteng Junior Chess
Disclaimer
The material published on this web page contains the views and opinions of participants in this open discussion on the state of chess in South Africa and does not by virtue of publication reflect the views and opinions of SAJCA