<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)"><div class="gmail_default">Dear Parminder,</div><div class="gmail_default"><br></div><div class="gmail_default">
Your position is valid in a predominantly multilateral environment as the ITU, where there are limits to Civil Society participation, in the absence of which balance does not prevail, and in the absence of balance, proximity of Business with Government is unhealthy.<br>
</div><div class="gmail_default"><br></div><div class="gmail_default">But if you seek to exclude Business from Pubic Policy, then the entire concept of multi-stakeholder governance is weakened. The basic idea of multi-stakeholder model is that each stakeholder group brings to the table, transparently, its own position representing its own best interests, which are balanced by the positions of other stakeholder groups. </div>
<div class="gmail_default"><br></div><div class="gmail_default">Your position indirectly reflects the views of our own Government, as that of many other Governments, that '<i>you are free to provide inputs, but we decide; Your role stops with participation (you will be heard), but you will have no role in framing the policy' </i>Single Quotes here does not imply exact wording of the position. The wording is my own, but roughly reflect the views of some in Government who I have occasion to talk to. If this is not the position of Indian Government, I would be happy to retract what I have said here :)</div>
<div class="gmail_default"><br></div><div class="gmail_default">By seeking to exclude Business, with the claim that it is "<span style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:13px;color:rgb(34,34,34)">position of many networks of large numbers of civil society organisations" that you work with [in India?], your views are aligned with the views of Government, and undermines the entire idea of multi-stakeholder model. </span></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><span style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:13px;color:rgb(34,34,34)"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default"><span style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:13px;color:rgb(34,34,34)">Perhaps you could announce that you will henceforth wear the Government Hat, then you are free to work towards multilateral model.</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><span style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:13px;color:rgb(34,34,34)"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default"><span style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:13px;color:rgb(34,34,34)">And for now, I am entirely with Adam's demand that you should withdraw your comment.</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><span style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:13px;color:rgb(34,34,34)"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default"><span style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:13px;color:rgb(34,34,34)">Thank you</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default"><span style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:13px;color:rgb(34,34,34)"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default"><span style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:13px;color:rgb(34,34,34)">Sivasubramanian M</span></div>
</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr"><a href="https://www.facebook.com/sivasubramanian.muthusamy" target="_blank">Sivasubramanian M</a><br><br></div></div>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 1:59 AM, parminder <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net" target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><div class="">
<br>
<div>On Friday 02 May 2014 09:41 PM, Lee W
McKnight wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;background-color:#ffffff;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">
<p>Those opposing businesses involvement in Internet governance
</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Involvement? well, no. Can you point to where did anyone oppose
their 'involvement' in Internet governance. Lee, even if we may have
different views, may I request that we try and represent other
people's positions fairly and honestly? The opposition is to
'equal' role' in 'public policy' 'decision making'..... Each element
is separately highlighted so that you miss none... And I think I
would have done this - highlighting all these elements - at least
25 times earlier on these lists, if not more. <br><div class="">
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;background-color:#ffffff;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">
<p>seem to forget who owns and operates the (data) networks
being inter-networked across the Internet; </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
So, since drug companies make all the medicine, they should have an
'equal role' in health/ drug related 'public policy making'? Please
be explicit in your response. Such examples can be given in
practically all sectors... As Mahesh said, since 'production/
business' is not the business of governments that should not mean
that regulating business is also not their business.. That precisely
is their business. You would have heard the term regulatory capture
- that is what is it to have (the regulated) businesses given an
equal role in relevant public policy making. <br><div class="">
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;background-color:#ffffff;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">
<p>not to mention the required consent of the massive legion of
-volunteer- techies who keep the whole thing afloat.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Anyway, it's kind of -late- in the day to begin pining for
the 19th century when governments could multilaterally agree
on tariffs and two-way revenue splits; it's just not happening
now.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>How governments choose to protect and/or abuse their own
citizens rights domestically is a whole other matter, but
really it is - just silly - to think the Internet can exist
without multistakeholder engagement.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>As the Internet has grown in global policy significance, ipso
facto, citizens of the world aka civil society, technical
community, and businesses, whether dreaded Hollywood IP rights
protectionists or -- lots of other businesses engaged in
aspects of networking - will have seats at the table. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Big business as citizens, well!! Indian law does not recognise
business as citizens... I know lately US supreme court have shown
the tendency towards such a perversion, like in the ruling on
corporate financing of elections, but I know that this judgement is
widely opposed by civil society even within the US...It surprises me
therefore that you are expressing such a view rather easily..<br>
<br>
I dont agree that businesses are citizens - national or global -
and have citizen rights, nor does all the civil society groups that
I work with, and I can assure you that, at least in developing
countries, they are the overwhelming majority (i know it is so in
developed countries as well). <br>
<br>
I think we need to figure out our basic political positions and
bearings here, in our internal civil society discourses, before we
begin raising banners about who represents civil society interests
and who does not.<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
parminder <br></font></span><div><div class="h5">
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;background-color:#ffffff;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">
<p><br>
</p>
<p>A multilateral table can amuse themselves, but not govern the
Internet.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>It is that reality which NetMundial recognizes; as does cough
cough China/Hong Kong hosting the Internet Hall of Fame dinner
3 weeks ago. (congrats to the winners, including Chinese
pioneers, by the way.)</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Anyway, to be 'shocked!' that McKinsey tells businesses to
pay attention to how trillions of dollars flow across the
Internet through the global economy is shocking only in its
presumption that businesses would not be paying attention.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>It does not obviate democracy anywhere, including in
participatory global Internet governance processes.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>The take-away lesson from Brazil that many took, which is we
are playing - in the big leagues now, and have to prepare
accordingly - is the correct lesson.
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>In my always humble opinion : )</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Lee<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div style="color:#282828">
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%">
<div dir="ltr"><font style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000" face="Calibri, sans-serif"><b>From:</b>
<a href="mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net</a>
<a href="mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank"><bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net></a> on behalf of
Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal
<a href="mailto:jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net" target="_blank"><jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net></a><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, May 2, 2014 11:51 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Rafik; Adam Peake<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Bits <a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>;
<a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org" target="_blank">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a> IGC<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [bestbits] Roles and Responsibilities
- CSTD working group on enhanced cooperation</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>
<div><span style="border-collapse:separate;color:#000000;font-family:optima;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;font-size:medium"><span style="text-indent:0px"><span style="text-indent:0px"><span style="text-indent:0px"><span style="border-collapse:separate;color:#000000;font-family:optima;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;font-size:medium">McKinsey supports the idea of a next
best stage of democracy and gives to MS its
blessings. You are in good company!!!</span></span></span></span></span></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>See below but in short, here are the best parts:</div>
<div>- "<b>The Role of Companies as citizens</b>" (NEW
DEMOCRACY! )</div>
<div>- When we say that what is happening in IG threatens
much more than the IG itself: " <span style="color:#333333;font-family:georgia,'times new roman',serif;font-size:13px;line-height:17px"><b>Why couldn’t we
disaggregate that process</b> (note by JCN: <i>the
public sector conducting policy making)</i>
<b>and start to bring together new partnerships, new
multistakeholder networks</b>"</span></div>
<div>- "<span style="color:#333333;font-family:georgia,'times new roman',serif;font-size:13px;line-height:17px"><b>And then
companies also gave money through philanthropy and so
on</b>": Ahah guys, there is some money to be given to
CS here!!!</span></div>
<div>- and the final touch "<span><b>Because
of the growing power of the digital revolution,
companies have growing power, and they need to step up
and be full participants in society, which is why it’s
so important that they understand the rise of these
new multistakeholder networks—global solution
networks—and participate in them</b>."</span></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This is why MS is a danger to democracy. It pretends to
replace a political system, and the citizens rights to be
the ultimate decision makers - at least in democracies -
thanks to their vote, and participation.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Think of all the niceties citizen had to fight against
the private sector. We should just trust the private
sector, thanks to new partnerships? We will end up with
thousand of Erin Brokovich fighting all over the places,
thanks to MS and its religious belief that the private
sector, co-decision maker in public policy will deliver
some sort of 'enhanced democracy".</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>No thanks!</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>JC</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>From McKinsey</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span>
<p style="color:#333333;margin:0px 0px 12px;padding:0px;font-family:georgia,'times new roman',serif;line-height:17px">
<strong style="margin:0px;padding:0px">The topic
of business</strong> wasn’t on the table at the
Bretton Woods Conference 70 years ago, when world
leaders convened to determine how the international
monetary and financial system would operate in the
wake of World War II. In this video interview with
McKinsey’s Rik Kirkland, author and consultant Don
Tapscott explains why today is different—and why
business must play a central role in solving global
problems. An edited transcript of Tapscott’s remarks
follows.</p>
<h4 style="margin:0px 0px 15px;padding:13px 0px 0px;font-weight:normal;font-size:1.384em;color:#e37222">
Interview transcript</h4>
<h3 style="margin:0px 0px 7px;padding:13px 0px 0px;font-weight:normal;font-size:1.231em;line-height:1.25em;color:#000000">
A new model for solving global problems</h3>
<p style="color:#333333;margin:0px 0px 12px;padding:0px;font-family:georgia,'times new roman',serif;line-height:17px">
There’s a fundamental change that’s underway in the
way that we solve problems, cooperate, and govern
ourselves on this little planet. And for 70 years,
actually 70 years, dating back to 1944 in Bretton
Woods, the model has been that states cooperate
together through diplomacy, state-based institutions,
or through some kind of direct action to solve
problems.</p>
<p style="color:#333333;margin:0px 0px 12px;padding:0px;font-family:georgia,'times new roman',serif;line-height:17px">
And if you look at the world today, many of the
problems that we have are not only stalled, they’re
getting worse. So are they just too hard to solve, or
is our model wrong? Well, enter a whole bunch of new
factors: one of them is technology, and that’s
radically dropping transaction and collaboration
costs. In the private sector, it’s leading to deep
changes in the architecture and structure of the firm
and of how we orchestrate capability to innovate, to
create goods and services, and so on.</p>
<p style="color:#333333;margin:0px 0px 12px;padding:0px;font-family:georgia,'times new roman',serif;line-height:17px">
In the public sector, it’s changing the way that we
get capability to create public value. Why wouldn’t
that affect the way that we get capability to solve
the problems in the world? Why couldn’t we
disaggregate that process and start to bring together
new partnerships, new multistakeholder networks?</p>
<p style="color:#333333;margin:0px 0px 12px;padding:0px;font-family:georgia,'times new roman',serif;line-height:17px">
A second thing that’s happening is we’ve got the rise
of the new “pillars of society,” in addition to
government. There were no corporations at Bretton
Woods in 1944, because they weren’t viewed as being
pillars of society. Companies were just these things
that made money for shareholders and created goods and
services.</p>
<p style="color:#333333;margin:0px 0px 12px;padding:0px;font-family:georgia,'times new roman',serif;line-height:17px">
There were also no NGOs<a rel="#footnote1" href="http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/strategy/The_flow_of_governance_An_interview_with_Don_Tapscott?cid=other-eml-alt-mgi-mck-oth-1405#" style="text-decoration:none;color:#0065bd;margin:0px;padding:0px" target="_blank"><sup>1</sup></a> at Bretton Woods, because there
weren’t any. There were 50 NGOs in the world in 1944.
Now we’ve got these new forces, and they’re coming
together into something that’s very, very powerful.
They’re multistakeholder networks, I call them global
solution networks. They’re engaging tens of thousands
of organizations—companies, governments, civil
society—and tens of millions of people on a daily
basis.</p>
<p style="color:#333333;margin:0px 0px 12px;padding:0px;font-family:georgia,'times new roman',serif;line-height:17px">
And they’re becoming material in the world. They’re
attacking every problem that we have. And they’re
creating wonderful new opportunities to address some
of the big challenges facing the global community.</p>
<h3 style="margin:0px 0px 7px;padding:13px 0px 0px;font-weight:normal;font-size:1.231em;line-height:1.25em;color:#000000">
The role of companies as citizens</h3>
<p style="color:#333333;margin:0px 0px 12px;padding:0px;font-family:georgia,'times new roman',serif;line-height:17px">
The existing institutions are being challenged by this
new model, and the smart ones are embracing it. So the
UN is starting to figure this out. There are a lot of
people who say the UN is no longer fit for function
and we should get rid of it and so on. I disagree with
that. States will be around for the foreseeable
future, and we need them to cooperate together. And
the UN is a key vehicle for that to occur.</p>
<p style="color:#333333;margin:0px 0px 12px;padding:0px;font-family:georgia,'times new roman',serif;line-height:17px">
But the UN is beginning to embrace the
multistakeholder model. And the big climate-change
conference that’s coming up in September is going to
be a true multistakeholder initiative with strong
representation from government, civil society, and the
private sector.</p>
<p style="color:#333333;margin:0px 0px 12px;padding:0px;font-family:georgia,'times new roman',serif;line-height:17px">
This brings about some really big changes for business
and how we think about business in the world.
Corporations can now contribute in ways that were
previously not possible. In the past, what did you do?
You tried maybe to be a good company, although lots
didn’t. But increasingly, you’ve got to get good
because of transparency—you’re going to get naked, and
you’ve got to be buff. And then companies also gave
money through philanthropy and so on.</p>
<p style="color:#333333;margin:0px 0px 12px;padding:0px;font-family:georgia,'times new roman',serif;line-height:17px">
But now companies can be equal partners with
governments and the civil society in bringing about
change in the world, and this of course is critical to
business because business can’t succeed in a world
that’s failing. We need to have global prosperity. We
need to have economic development. We need to solve
the problem of jobs. Youth unemployment is an epidemic
in the world today.</p>
<p style="color:#333333;margin:0px 0px 12px;padding:0px;font-family:georgia,'times new roman',serif;line-height:17px">
Because of the growing power of the digital
revolution, companies have growing power, and they
need to step up and be full participants in society,
which is why it’s so important that they understand
the rise of these new multistakeholder networks—global
solution networks—and participate in them.</p>
</span></div>
<br>
<div>
<div>Le 2 mai 2014 à 16:01, Rafik a écrit :</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>Hi Norbert,<br>
<br>
If I understand the argument against
Multistakeholderism I am hearing many times is to
mainly aimed to prevent private sector from having any
role. A position which de facto prevent civil society
from having role at all. I guess that is just a side
effect? There are problems with private sector
involvement but is is diverse stakeholder having SME
and big corporate, preventing it from participation
doesn't match democratic values you are mentioning .<br>
<br>
With the state-based model that you are defending, do
you really think that Tunisian government during wsis
2005 was really representing Tunisian citizens? It
will be just ironic while you are mentioning the
right of people for self-determination. The
state-based model is heaven for all non democratic
governments of the world ,and there are so many,
because they will silence easily any possible dissent
voicing at global level against their policies.<br>
<br>
Multistaholderism allowed me , the Tunisian and
coming from developing region to participate in such
process , but at least I have the decency to not
pretend speaking for all the south and the
marginalised of the world , I will stand against all
those attempts giving more rights to governments than
their own citizens. <br>
<br>
Multistakeholderism need and can be improved but what
you are defending cannot be improved at all.<br>
<br>
Rafik<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Le 2 May 2014 à 22:42, Norbert Bollow <<a href="mailto:nb@bollow.ch" target="_blank">nb@bollow.ch</a>>
a écrit :<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">TA art. 35 is very very
imperfect for a variety of reasons.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">It also was dangerous ten
years ago in ways which are not a real danger<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">today.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Today it is IMO an immediate
and concrete danger that carelessly<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">designed (and thereby
non-democratic) multistakeholder public policy<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">processes could give big
business the power to effectively undermine<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">the human right of the peoples
to democratic self-determination.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">In the relevant international
human rights treaty, the ICCPR, the legal<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">construct through which this
human right is established is via the<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">public policy role of states:
First it is declared that the peoples<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">have a right to
self-determination, and later in the document the<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">right to democratic processes
is established.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">I am not asserting that this
state-based model is the only possible<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">model of democracy, but it is
what we have. I certainly don't want to<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">forsake it before a proven
alternative is available.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Until then I will support TA
art. 35 with its privileging of states.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">From my perspective there is
no need for Parminder to retract anything.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">I agree of course that there
are currently very real problems almost<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">every time that states try to
get involved in a privileged role as<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">states in Internet governance.
And I'm not talking just about the<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">various examples of totally
non-democratic states here.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">I propose to address these
problems by means of measures such as those<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">proposed on <a href="http://wisdomtaskforce.org/" target="_blank">http://wisdomtaskforce.org/</a><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Greetings,<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Norbert<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Am Fri, 2 May 2014 21:58:47
+0900<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">schrieb Adam Peake <<a href="mailto:ajp@glocom.ac.jp" target="_blank">ajp@glocom.ac.jp</a>>:<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Dear Parminder,<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">To the best of my knowledge,
no civil society entity has supported<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">paragraph 35 of the Tunis
Agenda (paragraph 49 Geneva Declaration of<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Principles.) It was the
position of the Civil Society Plenary in<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Tunis that this language was
unacceptable. To the best of my<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">knowledge this position has
not changed. As recently as last week in<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Sao Paulo it was a matter
that unified civil society: clearly we<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">oppose paragraph 35.<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">So it was very surprising to
read that you, as a representative of<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">civil society on the CSTD
working group on enhanced cooperation<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">should support this
language, and in doing so associate yourself with<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">business, Iran, Saudi
Arabia, among others.<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Please retract your comment
supporting the Tunis Agenda text on roles<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">and responsibilities as
copied below from the transcript. You have<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">time to do so before the WG
finishes its meeting later today.<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Paragraph 35 of the Tunis
Agenda also below.<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Please act immediately.<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Thank you,<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Adam<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">PARMINDER JEET SINGH:
THANK YOU, CHAIR. MY COMMENTS GO IN THE SAME<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">DIRECTION AS THE SPEAKER
PREVIOUS TO ME, MARILYN, THAT IT SHOULD BE<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">RETAINED, THIS
PARTICULAR PHRASE OF OUR RESPECTIVE ROLES AND<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">RESPONSIBILITIES AND TO
JUSTIFY IT, I MAY ADD THAT THE TUNIS AGENDA<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">TALKS ABOUT THESE ROLES
SPECIFICALLY IN THE CONTEXT OF PUBLIC<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">POLICY MAKING AND NOT
GENERALLY IN VARIOUS OTHER SOCIAL ENTERPRISES<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">AND ACTIVITIES ALL OF US
GET INVOLVED IN. AND THIS PARAGRAPH ALSO<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">ENDS IN IMPLEMENTATION
OF ENHANCED COOPERATION WHICH IN MY AND MANY<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">PEOPLE'S UNDERSTANDING
IS SPECIFICALLY ONLY ABOUT PUBLIC POLICY<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">MAKING. <br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">IT IS IN THIS REGARD, AT
LEAST IN MY MIND, I HAVE CLARITY ABOUT WHAT<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">IS THE ROLE OF DIFFERENT
STAKEHOLDERS BEING QUITE DIFFERENT TO ONE<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">ANOTHER AND I DON'T
APPRECIATE THAT NON-GOVERNMENTAL ACTORS WOULD<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">HAVE THE SAME ROLE IN
DECISION-MAKING MAKING THAN GOVERNMENTAL<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">ACTORS. THAT SHOULD NOT BE
ACCEPTABLE AT A GLOBAL LEVEL. THERE IS A<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">REASON FOR US TO INSIST ON
IT BECAUSE I REMEMBER IN THE SECOND<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">MEETING, I SPECIFICALLY
ASKED THE QUESTION ABOUT PEOPLE ASKING FOR<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">EQUAL ROLES AND ASKED
WHETHER THEY REALLY ARE SEEKING AN EQUAL ROLE<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">IN PUBLIC POLICY MAKING. I
ASKED IT FROM THE PRIVATE SECTOR<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">REPRESENTATIVE WHO THEN
RESPONDED TO SAID I SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">PRIVATE SECTOR AND THEY SAY,
YES, WE WANT TO AN EQUAL FOOTING OF<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">DECISION-MAKING. THIS IS
PART OF THE MEETING. IT IS THIS PART OF<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">DEMOCRACY WHICH HAS ACUTELY
BOTHERED US. I HAVE SAID THIS EARLIER.<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">BUT I INSIST TO SAY THAT
AGAIN BECAUSE THERE ARES INENCE ON -- THEIR<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">INSISTENCE ON ROLES AND
RESPONSIBILITIES COMES BACK AND AGAIN. FOR ME<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">THAT IS IMPORTANT AND WE
WOULD LIKE THAT PHRASE TO BE RETAINED. THANK<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">YOU. <br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">CHAIR MAJOR: THANK YOU,
PARMINDER. <br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Tunis Agenda<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">35. We reaffirm that the
management of the Internet encompasses both<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">technical and public policy
issues and should involve all<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">stakeholders and relevant
intergovernmental and international<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">organizations. In this
respect it is recognized that: a) Policy<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">authority for
Internet-related public policy issues is the
sovereign<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">right of States. They have
rights and responsibilities for<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">international
Internet-related public policy issues. b) The
private<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">sector has had, and should
continue to have, an important role in the<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">development of the Internet,
both in the technical and economic<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">fields. c) Civil society has
also played an important role on<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Internet matters, especially
at community level, and should continue<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">to play such a role. d)
Intergovernmental organizations have had, and<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">should continue to have, a
facilitating role in the coordination of<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Internet-related public
policy issues. e) International organizations<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">have also had and should
continue to have an important role in the<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">development of
Internet-related technical standards and relevant<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">policies.<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">____________________________________________________________<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">You received this message as a
subscriber on the list:<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"> <a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">To unsubscribe or change your
settings, visit:<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"> <a href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits" target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits</a><br>
</blockquote>
____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.<br>
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:<br>
<a href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits" target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits</a></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></div>
<br>____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.<br>
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:<br>
<a href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits" target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div>