[bestbits] [governance] Call for making the IGF permanent

Stephanie Perrin stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
Tue Sep 2 04:38:41 EDT 2014


Thanks George, we are indeed trying to be constructive.  I have tried to 
reflect some of the previous comments in the draft, which is here at 
https://etherpad.mozilla.org/LQO468JD1K 
<https://etherpad.mozilla.org/LQO468JD1K>

  and will do another roundup later today.  We aim for mid-week.  In my 
view, the broader the funding the better, as it weakens  the risk of 
capture.  We cannot, as others have pointed out, go to the UN asking for 
a permanent body without describing potential funding.
Cheers and thanks for all the help and support.
Stephanie Perrin

On 2014-09-01, 17:52, George Sadowsky wrote:
> There are other rigidities in the UN system that may not be compatible 
> with the overall aims of the IGF.  My Taiwan illustration was just 
> that.   And, by the way, to get a new activity into the UN regular 
> budget is enormously difficult; the UN relies on so-called 
> extra-budgetary funds for many of its initiatives, and that represents 
> insecure funding.
>
> In response to a previous post, I don't think that Carlos is 
> suggesting that no funding come from the UN.  I note that the Internet 
> Society has just initiated a call for funding the IGF on a more 
> permanent basis.  In the past, ICANN has provided major funding, and 
> so have some governments.
>
> I see nothing wrong with accepting funding from all sectors, provided 
> that the funding is used in a fair and responsible manner and is not 
> used to promote the special interests of the sector.  This has in part 
> been the case so far, and is a reasonable model to promote.  You may 
> wish to add some  caveats, but the principle stands.  All sectors do 
> have their own interests, but none are pure evil.  All sectors have 
> something to gain from the IGF or they would not contribute.
>
> I wish that we could have discussions like this in a more cooperative 
> mode rather than an environment of suspicion.
>
> George
>
>
> On Sep 1, 2014, at 5:38 PM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net 
> <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net>> wrote:
>
>>
>> If not the UN then there is this tantalising offer from the WEF, 
>> maybe that. It has either to be public funding or corporate funding, 
>> one can make one's choice which is better. Because, even an organised 
>> public dialogue, much less the more complex things that the IGF is 
>> being prepared for, cannot be undertaken 'on the street' by 'people' 
>> without resources and some holding organisation. If you have any 
>> doubt about this assertion, please note that no one has proposed the 
>> World Social Forum to hold the global IG process together, as the WEF 
>> is being proposed, if yet somewhat cautiously.
>>
>> It is certainly strange how a special case of Taiwan is being offered 
>> to show problems with the UN system, but one does not see what is 
>> wrong with ICANN's US-hood or WEF's big business nature.
>>
>> parminder
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday 02 September 2014 02:12 AM, Vanda Scartezini wrote:
>>> I agree with Sadovsky. This idea goes into the direction of having IGF
>>> totally controlled by government, than to promote enlarge participation on
>>> IGF.
>>> Any body inside UN shall obviously be under UN rules and this means also
>>> long  time to take decisions due to consultations to any government,
>>> besides all other bureaucracy anyone used to deal with UN can easily
>>> report.
>>> Better not to go through this path.
>>> Vanda Scartezini
>>> Polo Consultores Associados
>>> Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004
>>> 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
>>> Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253
>>> Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/1/14, 11:54, "George Sadowsky"<george.sadowsky at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> All,
>>>>
>>>> There is an issue that has not been mentioned in this thread.  The UN is
>>>> not totally representative of the world's population, and decisions
>>>> regarding who is a members state and who is not are political decisions
>>>> made by the UN General Assembly.
>>>>
>>>> Case in point: no one from Taiwan is allowed to participate, even as a
>>>> non-speaking participant, in the IGF.  There was a rumor in Athens (2006)
>>>> that a Taiwanese was planning to come, and those of us on the MAG at the
>>>> time who were working the event were told to let management know if he
>>>> showed up so that he could be denied admission.
>>>>
>>>> Another case, in the opposite direction, is that of Palestine.  It was
>>>> finally allowed UN status in the 1990s only when Israel was unable to
>>>> further block its entry, and then it was given 'observer status.'  This
>>>> delayed providing it with a country code, and therefore a country code
>>>> TLD to be used in the territory and to be included in the DNS root zone.
>>>>
>>>> I speak from personal involvement in both of those events.  There are
>>>> probably others which are similar and which I am not aware of.
>>>>
>>>> So any move to unite the IGF and the UN can have consequences that are
>>>> not foreseen, and and may well not be in the interests of democratic,
>>>> bottom up, participatory activity.  Please, in your enthusiasm, do not
>>>> increase -- and decrease if possible  --  your reliance upon UN
>>>> administration/control/funding of future IGFs.
>>>>
>>>> George
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 1, 2014, at 10:00 AM, Carlos A. Afonso<ca at cafonso.ca>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If it has to become a formal body, I would not like to see it becoming
>>>>> a sort of UN agency. If it is not a UN agency, funding should come from
>>>>> other sources.
>>>>>
>>>>> --c.a.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 09/01/2014 09:27 AM, parminder wrote:
>>>>>> I support the call.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It should be accompanied with the UN providing permanent institutional
>>>>>> funding for it.  Nothing can be permanent and stable without clear and
>>>>>> stable source of funding.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BTW, the IGF is right now a 'project' of UNDESA, and projects normally
>>>>>> are not permanent. For being permanent it has to be an incorporated
>>>>>> body
>>>>>> with institutional funding.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anne, in the CSTD WG on IGF improvements,  IT for Change and some
>>>>>> developing country asked for a part of domain names tax collected by
>>>>>> ICANN to be dedicated to IGF funding. This has to be done in a
>>>>>> statutory/ constitutional manner and not as ad hoc, upto ICANN,
>>>>>> measure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> parminder
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Monday 01 September 2014 02:13 PM, Anne Jellema wrote:
>>>>>>> Actually the point about stable and predictable funding - and I would
>>>>>>> add to that, transparent and accountable financial management - seems
>>>>>>> just as important as (and closely linked to) the permanent mandate.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> WF continues to advocate that a % of gTLD revenues be set aside for
>>>>>>> this purpose, as well as for other public benefit purposes, but if it
>>>>>>> is considered unwise to mix ICANN issues with IGF issues then perhaps
>>>>>>> it's enough just to reference the need for expanded, predictable
>>>>>>> funding that is transparently accounted for.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> cheers
>>>>>>> Anne
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Eduardo Bertoni
>>>>>>> <ebertoni at alumni.gwu.edu  <mailto:ebertoni at alumni.gwu.edu>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     I support Joana´s idea re taking into account what the NetMundial
>>>>>>>     final declaration says. I would only add that the "next" IGF
>>>>>>>     should do better in linking its agenda and wok with the regional
>>>>>>>     IGFs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     e
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     Eduardo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Joana Varon
>>>>>>>     <joana at varonferraz.com  <mailto:joana at varonferraz.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         Agree.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         At NETMundial final statement, this is what we have on IGF:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         "There is a need for a strengthened Internet Governance Forum
>>>>>>>         (IGF). Important recommendations to that end were made by the
>>>>>>>         UN CSTD working group on IGF improvements. It is suggested
>>>>>>>         that these recommendations will be
>>>>>>>         implemented by the end of 2015. Improvements should include
>>>>>>>         inter-alia:
>>>>>>>         a.Improved outcomes: Improvements can be implemented including
>>>>>>>         creative
>>>>>>>         ways of providing outcomes/recommendations and the analysis of
>>>>>>>         policy options;
>>>>>>>         b.Extending the IGF mandate beyond five-year terms;
>>>>>>>         c. Ensuring guaranteed stable and predictable funding for the
>>>>>>>         IGF, including
>>>>>>>         through a broadened donor base, is essential;
>>>>>>>         d. The IGF should adopt mechanisms to promote worldwide
>>>>>>>         discussions
>>>>>>>         between meetings through intersessional dialogues.
>>>>>>>         A strengthened IGF could better serve as a platform for
>>>>>>>         discussing both long
>>>>>>>         standing and emerging issues with a view to contributing to
>>>>>>>         the identification of
>>>>>>>         possible ways to address them."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         We could departure from that and add "ask the UN to make the
>>>>>>>         IGF a permanent body instead of renewing its mandate for
>>>>>>>         another limited term of 5 or 10 years."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         1Net could also be a platform to facilitate this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         best
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         joana
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 4:48 AM, João Carlos R. Caribé
>>>>>>>         <joao.caribe at me.com  <mailto:joao.caribe at me.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>             Unfortunately I missed that meeting, so I full support
>>>>>>>             this idea count me on to support as I can.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>             _
>>>>>>>             João Carlos Caribé
>>>>>>>             (021) 8761 1967
>>>>>>>             (021) 4042 7727
>>>>>>>             Skype joaocaribe
>>>>>>>             Enviado via iPad
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>             > Em 01/09/2014, às 11:33, Jeanette Hofmann
>>>>>>>             <jeanette at wzb.eu  <mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu>> escreveu:
>>>>>>>             >
>>>>>>>             > Hi all,
>>>>>>>             >
>>>>>>>             > at the BB meeting yesterday we discussed the idea of a
>>>>>>>             BB statement that would ask the UN to make the IGF a
>>>>>>>             permanent body instead of renewing its mandate for another
>>>>>>>             limited term of 5 or 10 years.
>>>>>>>             > This idea found broad support among the attendees of the
>>>>>>>             BB meeting.
>>>>>>>             >
>>>>>>>             > Later on I discussed the content of such a statement
>>>>>>>             with other stakeholders at the IGF and I got the
>>>>>>>             impression that we might be able to draft a
>>>>>>>             cross-stakeholder statement together with the technical
>>>>>>>             community and the private sector. (Individual governments
>>>>>>>             support such a statement too but I am not sure it would be
>>>>>>>             possible within the few days available to coordiante
>>>>>>>             enough signatures by governments to make this an all
>>>>>>>             inclusive statement.)
>>>>>>>             >
>>>>>>>             > Right now, a multi-stakeholder statement coming out of
>>>>>>>             this IGF is only an idea that needs further exploration
>>>>>>>             within the respective groups. So, with this email to the
>>>>>>>             bb list and the IGC list I am asking for your opinions to
>>>>>>>             find out if such a cross-stakeholder statement would find
>>>>>>>             support in civil society.
>>>>>>>             >
>>>>>>>             > jeanette
>>>>>>>             >
>>>>>>>             > P.S. Lately, I have been unable to post to the IGC list.
>>>>>>>             If this email does not appear on the IGC list, would
>>>>>>>             someone be so kind to forward it?
>>>>>>>             >
>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>>>             > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>>>>             >bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
>>>>>>>             <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>.
>>>>>>>             > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>>>>>>             >http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>             
>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>>>             You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>>>>             bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
>>>>>>>             <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>.
>>>>>>>             To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>>>>>>             http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         --         --
>>>>>>>         Joana Varon Ferraz
>>>>>>>         @joana_varon
>>>>>>>         PGP 0x016B8E73
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>>>         You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>>>>         bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
>>>>>>> <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>.
>>>>>>>         To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>>>>>>         http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>>>     You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>>>>     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net  <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>.
>>>>>>>     To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>>>>>>     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Anne Jellema
>>>>>>> CEO
>>>>>>> +27 061 36 9352 (ZA)
>>>>>>> +1 202 684 6885 (US)
>>>>>>> @afjellema
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>> *World Wide Web Foundation | 1110 Vermont Ave NW, Suite 500,
>>>>>>> Washington DC, 20005, USA |www.webfoundation.org
>>>>>>> <http://www.webfoundation.org/>  | Twitter: @webfoundation*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>>>>       bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>>>>>>       http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>>>       bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>>>>>       http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>>>>>
>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>>>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>>>>
>>>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>>>>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>>>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>>>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>>>>
>>>>> Translate this email:http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>>>
>>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>>>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>>>
>>>> Translate this email:http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>       bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>       http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140902/eca90257/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t


More information about the Governance mailing list