<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Monday 10 February 2014 12:23 PM,
David Cake wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:965DB481-C761-4A4D-A932-B0FCF4BBBF37@difference.com.au"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<br>
<div>
<div>On 10 Feb 2014, at 6:16 am, michael gurstein <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div link="blue" vlink="purple" style="font-family: Helvetica;
font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal;
font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height:
normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px;
text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto;
word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"
lang="EN-US">
<div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1;">
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt;
font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span
style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">Precisely what
are people afraid of in insisting that 1Net, a
formation that was interposed and interposed itself
between “CS” and the Brazil meeting, make transparent
its decision making processes including in the crucial
areas of financial supports and expenditures and
decisions as to inclusions and exclusions. </span></div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>I
am not afraid at all of 1Net increasing its transparency and
accountability mechanisms - on the contrary, that would clearly
be a positive outcome. But I am quite afraid that we will spend
a much larger amount of time debating the internal functioning
of 1net, which at this point is largely a mechanism for dealing
with administrative issues to do with a single event, rather
than focussing on the substantive policy outcomes of that, and
future, events. <br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
This is untrue on both counts. The fact being as below;<br>
<br>
(1) The primary purpose of the 1Net is to strongly influence (if not
actually write) the outcomes of the Brazil meeting (something I have
been insisting since the very beginning)<br>
<br>
(2) The serious 1Net-ers want it to be a standing multistakeholder
mechanism. So many have explicitly said so on so many lists.<br>
<br>
I think one-sided naivete is not the best response for civil society
to take to all this, which unfortunately seems to be the dominant
response. (I say one-sided naivete becuase there is hardly any
naivete when for instance a UN kind of process is involved.)<br>
<br>
People in post colonial societies cannot but use colonial analogies
to understand geo- political situations. The British set up an
establishment in India 'merely' to facilitate its trade to 'the
east'. They ended up ruling the country for more than a century.
Apologies if the analogy is seen as 'too strong' - it is merely to
underline the need for political foresight...<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:965DB481-C761-4A4D-A932-B0FCF4BBBF37@difference.com.au"
type="cite">
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Regards</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>David</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span></div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>