<html><head><meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type" /><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1" /><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1" /></head><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">For what it is worth:<br>
<br>
ITU activities and the WSIS+10 review are actually separate things - and the WSIS+10 Review is a bigger thing by far than the ITU's activities, as WSIS is UN-system-wide and the ITU is just one agency.<br>
<br>
Given that the WSIS+10 review and the MDG review both take place in 2015, there's an obvious opportunity.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">parminder <parminder@itforchange.net> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<br />
<font face="Verdana">Thanks to the steering committee for this great
start....</font><br />
<br />
I havent much to say about day 1. Maybe a few things, but that
later...<br />
<br />
Abut day 2<br />
<br />
I think we would do well if we try not to look very ITU centric (
and I can assure, we do)... Last year was different with the WCIT in
the offing, but this year I dont see why a session should focus on
ITU.<br />
<br />
As to saying that Snowden or NSA revelations can become a sub item
of this ITU discussion, quite the opposite is what I think would be
in order..<br />
<br />
Lets be honest, and do justice to the people of the world in whose
name we assemble, work and expend monies.... Internet governance to
the world right now is completely focussed on the Snowden affair.
Not only among the laity, but even the politically well informed and
articulate. <br />
<br />
It is bad enough that the IGF wont largely be about NSA revelations
(even to the extent that Kenya IGF was about the India's CIRP
proposal) although I will be happy to be pleasantly surprised. But I
cant see how a civil society meeting can afford to be not about it.
This is my basic proposition..<br />
<br />
I think we need to have a session on something very roughly like the
'The global Internet after Snowden - What will balkanise the
Internet and what can keep it sufficiently global' - and if possible
come out with a statement about it. <br />
<br />
At the time of formation of BB, we had promised ourselves a positive
agenda , and flogging ITU over a day once again is not what I think
takes us towards that. (Disclaimer: I have long held that the ITU is
not the right place for most global IG work.)<br />
<br />
People are interested to know in which directions would post Snowden
global Internet go. And we should discuss this.<br />
<br />
Lets cut the chaff and go directly to what is/ are the issue(s) of
global governance of the Internet today. For instance - what are the
global ethics, norms, principles and legal frameworks for
trans-border flow of data, information and digital services? Who
should develop ( ensure their compliance) and how?<br />
<br />
And wh- at is the meaning of ownership of our digital lives, and how
statist and corporatist controls play with such rightful ownership.
<br />
<br />
That is what people right now most want to know... Do we have
anything to say to them, and perhaps say on the behalf of them?<br />
<br />
parminder <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Saturday 10 August 2013 09:06 PM,
Jeremy Malcolm wrote:<br />
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:36DD99DF-3B81-4184-8F47-D1C6DD9C4451@ciroap.org" type="cite">
Since the good news that the 2013 IGF will be going ahead after
all, it's time to revise and finalise the programme for our annual
meeting in Bali. The interim steering group has been talking
about this, and here was their suggestion for topics (the
descriptions are mine though):<br />
<br />
<b>Day 1</b>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>1) Best Bits itself: goals, structure, processes,
fundraising, interactions with other groups, etc. The interim
steering group is working on a documents with our brainstorming
about all this, which we will share soon. The purpose of this
session is to reach a consensus that we are heading in the right
direction (or not), and to provide a mandate to carry out
proposals that will help us grow and become stronger and more
sustainable.</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>2) Global Internet governance principles and Enhanced
Cooperation. As you know, there are groups at the IGF MAG and
the CSTD discussing these issues, but until now there has been
no strong unified civil society position about the evolution of
Internet governance arrangements, and this equivocation has
played into the wrong hands. We have been largely split between
groups that are averse to any changes, and those with proposals
for changes that are seen as radical. The purpose of this
session (as I see it, anyway) is to get together behind a shared
position that can become a solid base for advocacy. We already
have a working group arguing over these issues (in a good way),
which will report back to this main list soon.</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div><b>Day 2</b><br />
<br />
3) The ITU processes, up to the ITU Plenipotentiary in 2014 and
the WSIS+10 review. What is coming up? What is our long term
strategy? Have we responded adequately to the ITU's most recent
refusal to open up the Council Working Group on Internet Policy
to stakeholders? If we still don't see change at
the Plenipotentiary, what then - do we disengage?</div>
<div><br />
4) The NSA surveillance issue may become a sub-item of the ITU
discussion, given that there are countries that may bring this
debate to the ITU. But it will also include an update on
the Human Rights Council, stateside developments, how this has
altered the Internet governance landscape in the long term, and
general strategy going forward.<br />
<br />
There's also a lot of other work to be done between now and
then, including work on the website (so that you can actually
register for the meeting!) and on fundraising (to help pay for
it). I'll be posting more about that very soon.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile your comments are invited on the programme...<br />
<br />
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br />
<p style="font-size:9.0pt;color:black"><b>Dr Jeremy Malcolm<br />
Senior Policy Officer<br />
Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for
consumers</b><br />
Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East<br />
Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia<br />
Tel: +60 3 7726 1599</p>
<!--<p style="font-size:9.0pt;color:black"><b>Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:</b> <a href="http://consint.info/RightsMission">http://consint.info/RightsMission</a></p>-->
<p style="font-size:9.0pt;color:black">Explore our new
Resource Zone - the global consumer movement knowledge hub |
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/resource-zone">http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/resource-zone</a></p>
<p style="font-size:9.0pt;color:black">@Consumers_Int | <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.consumersinternational.org">www.consumersinternational.org</a>
| <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational">www.facebook.com/consumersinternational</a></p>
<p style="font-size:8.0pt;color:#999999">Read our <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality" target="_blank">email confidentiality notice</a>. Don't
print this email unless necessary.</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br />
</blockquote></div><br>
- Sent from my handheld thingie; please forgive linguistic mangling and brevity.<br>
</body></html>