Further the Tse Pin debate.

Ref: Here.

This is Tse Pin's reply to my comments.

"I think you have sensationalized the issue. The amt quoted was tabled in the Council meeting and everyone who attended the meeting are aware of the situation. The main weakness is nobody within MCF Finance Dept (Sub-committee) actually follow thru the implementation process, so it leads to inefficiency. When I commented on Fadli's posting, the intention is to give some in-sight on what's going before it leads to major accusation on rating fee disappeared under a personal account. Fyi, rating fees collected / uncollected for each event are well documented for President's eye".

I think it is healthy that Tse Pin has replied but perhaps he has not yet realised the gravity of his earlier public statement. This allows us an insight into MCF processes by a committee member. The first thing I want to point out is that the MCF Finance committee is just an eye wash according to my sources and in reality there is only one man calling the shots. But even if that was not the case, can I ask why the sudden need to clear the debt with Tse Pin now? What has happened to all the money collected during Asian Amateur and the mysterious deal with multiple sponsors at the Melaka event?

The fact is that MCF has never produced any project accounts and that in itself is mismanagement of public funds.

Notwithstanding Tse Pin's argument that the Rating fees was tabled and accepted by the full committee, it doesn't extend to the monies collected being allowed to be paid into his private account. Even if that is not improper he will still need a resolution from the same full committee to allow that and not just the word of the Secretary. This is all very improper and I believe is strong grounds for investigation by COS. I believe those parties asked to do so can lodge a formal complaint with COS.

But there is another impropriety that I also raised during my time in PICA. The accounts cannot be for the eyes of the President only. MCF is an NGO handling public money. The accounts should be tabled to the full committee and submitted at the AGM for the member Associations to vet and question.

An aside: ( It was my strong suspicion at that time that this practice allows the President to give preferential treatment to his cronies without the awareness of the rest of the committee. And ultimately, in law, the full committee bears the responsibility upon an investigation)

Now since this has never to my knowledge been done before, I wonder what accounts for the President's eye only really mean in MCF? Doesn't this also raise strong suspicion of vote buying? We know that the AGM is looming and I hear stories almost daily of Greg scrambling for votes.

So Tse Pin, my advice is to keep your name clean. This could be a trap for you. Once you accept that money you will be in the same boat. I don't think your reputation is only worth RM4K. I think you are worth far more than that.

This whole MCF affair is really starting to stink and there are people highly offended by the way things are done. Things are coming to a head and it may explode in your face.

I am non partisan in the struggle for post but I do stand for what is good for Malaysian chess having experienced first hand myself how vicious MCF politics can be. And that means I stand for good governance and transparency.

So in this case, I believe Fadli is in a strong position and correct in bringing this matter up for public debate. And this case is really only the tip of the iceberg. Once a report is lodged it is going to open a big big can of worms. 30 plus years worth.

So like I said before, why don't you guys play nice and give ground to the legitimate and very reasonable and proper demands of affected parents, national players as well as independent organisers, trainers and coaches. A legal battle is not good for Malaysian chess. But the rights of the entire chess community cannot be highjacked by a few opportunists. That is what I am urging all parties to consider before the upcoming AGM.

For a reasonable discussion cut out the lies and BS. That just adds insult to injury. Try that. Sit down and talk properly like officers and gentlemen.

Fiduciary rights.

The debate continues. Ref: Here.

Amazing. Everything is reduced to friend, friend.

Lets talk about fiduciary rights today. In any venture many people contribute to its success. And everyone has rights. But it is not easy to quantify. One measure that is used to throw some light is called fiduciary rights ie the quantum of financial outlay in any venture.

Lets take the case of developing a National Player. Who are involved? Arguably the Associations, sponsors, organisers, trainers, coaches, parents and the players themselves. Each have rights. So lets use this fiduciary measure to try to quantify.

The law is not very lenient to businesses since they are deemed to have measured their sponsorship vs their returns before sponsoring. We can also roughly say the trainers, coaches, organisers have been paid for services rendered.

So where does the money come from to develop our National players? Who pays for the overseas tournaments, the trainers, coaches etc? Sponsors and parents thats who. Now if the case was that the Associations brought in the sponsorships, the weightage shifts. But there are still rights apportioned in each case.

In the Malaysian scenario, the vast bulk of the money comes from the parents. Some have more sponsorship than others. But in the main, it is also the parents that go out to get the sponsorship. So again the weightage remains with the parents. Actually many parents pay out of their own pockets.

So we can argue that the major investor is in fact the parents.

Let us use an example here. Lets take the last Mal/Sing. The sponsor came up with RM1,500 worth of incentives to be shared by all the players. In this case this was arranged by the Federation. How much do you think each parent spent? I am not saying that the sponsors have no rights. I am just saying things must be looked at in a measured and balanced way.

Throw in Asean, Asian youth, Asian Junior, World Youth and World Junior and the picture changes again. Who pays for the trips, the training? Who puts their heart into the training to represent the Country?

So I submit that Organisers do not have carte blanche. And I believe this should be put to the test. An appeal should be submitted to MCF. I trust that MCF will stay true to its first article. It is our right to appeal. Why is that equated to being a trouble maker? Trouble for whom? This is a just and legal due process.

We are not playing marbles here. There is a heavy financial outlay which needs to be respected too. So do follow the argument in the debate. Dont allow yourself to be side tracked by the misdirection and belligerence etc etc.

ps: If a case involves a Perak player, it is also our right to bring the case up to our Regent.