Wow, interesting. <br><br>Should I consider myself not cautious or clever enough :-) for daring to utter an idea like : "a multi-stakeholder forum could/should be financed in a multi-stakeholder way ?" And remember I indicated with appropriate rules of transparency.
<br><br>I'm afraid your reply is not of the same tune as my modest contribution and the tonality is a bit harsh, as if I were suggesting something horrendous. I respect your position, as usual, but as I suppose you are speaking in a personal capacity and not as coordinator, maybe we should let people discuss it. That's the purpose of this list, isn't it ?
<br><br>I am not sure this question can simply be brushed aside by your answer. And I'm not sure we understand the same thing when we speak of multi-stakeholder financing. In particular, you did not mention the distinction I was making between "automatic resources" and "ad hoc resources". Do you think that a foundation providing transparent financing to a Dynamic Coalition would be bad ?
<br><br>Anyway, I'd be happy to learn what your own preference would be, what concrete solution you favor : just governments ? or just the UN ? or just some international organizations ? The key question is, again : what is the appropriate financing structure for the IGF in order to guarantee regularity of resources and independence from lobbies and pressure groups ? Can we address this issue calmly, with the attention it deserves ?
<br><br>In any case, using words like "<font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;">what recently
happened at IGF would be scandalous. In some countries it will veer towards
criminal" <span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">was not necessary to make your point. Especially in a response to that post. Unless you imply - without saying - that those words are applicable to what I mentionned or you hope I might be encouraged to shut up by fear of being accused of the above. In such a case, I sincerely hope we can avoid this on this list. There are enough important issues that need to be discussed in a mature manner, and I am merely, as usual, trying to provide some constructive input.
<br><br>Best as ever<br><br>Bertrand <br><br><br></span></span></font><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 6/11/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Parminder</b> <<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net
</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div link="blue" vlink="blue" lang="EN-US">
<div>
<p><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;">No Bertrand, Multistakeholder financing is
a very bad idea. And, an even worse principle. When we speak MS, I am often
afraid this idea is lurking somewhere. But most people are cautious/ clever
enough not to mention it expressly. In fact, that's the big difference between
how things, less-than-ideally, may actually be, and when we openly start
articulating such things as acceptable principles. </span></font></p>
<p><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"> </span></font></p>
<p><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;">When Milton said, it is simple –
those who fund IGF will push their agenda, and so those others who want their
agenda pushed should step up their contribution – I responded that
however practical it be, this looks like a principle which will take us to not
good outcomes at all – for CS and for public interest. For instance, I
want my agenda pushed, what should I do. I don't have money to
contribute. And I cant go to my government (per Milton's advise) because my government doesn't
share my agenda. And he called it moral posturing, I hope you don't come
back in the same vein. For me and many in public interest advocacy it is an important
principle, and I cant let such formulations pass by.. </span></font></p>
<p><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"> </span></font></p>
<p><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;">It if fine for private parties to finance
public functions and bodies where there is a plurality – like a
foundation funding a university program or an NGO. It is also fine to extend
part financing, under certain conditions, to core public bodies which are
monopolistic (states, UN bodies etc) in their constituency and mandate, but
then the proportion of private funding needs to be adequately low for any one
interest group (as well as in total proportion to public funds) , and it should
be governed with strict rules of propriety etc. Under such rules what recently
happened at IGF would be scandalous. In some countries it will veer towards
criminal. </span></font></p>
<p><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"> </span></font></p>
<p><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;">Many in the CS (outside the typical IG/IS
groups) who are sometimes suspicious of the term multistakeholder feel so because
they known such bodies can easily show tendencies to move towards 'privatised
governance'. We may be realizing their worst fears. </span></font></p>
<p><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"> </span></font></p>
<p><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;">Parminder </span></font></p>
<p><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"> </span></font></p>
<div>
<p><font color="gray" face="Arial Narrow" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; color: gray;">________________________________________________</span></font><font color="navy"><span style="color: navy;"></span></font></p>
<p><font color="gray" face="Arial Narrow" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; color: gray;">Parminder Jeet
Singh</span></font><font color="navy"><span style="color: navy;"></span></font></p>
<p><font color="gray" face="Arial Narrow" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; color: gray;">IT for Change, Bangalore</span></font><font color="navy"><span style="color: navy;"></span></font></p>
<p><em><i><font color="gray" face="Arial Narrow" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; color: gray;">Bridging
Development Realities and Technological Possibilities</span></font></i></em><font color="gray" face="Arial Narrow" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; color: gray;"> </span></font><font color="navy"><span style="color: navy;">
</span></font></p>
<p><font color="gray" face="Arial Narrow" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; color: gray;">Tel: (+91-80)
2665 4134, 2653 6890</span></font><font color="navy"><span style="color: navy;"></span></font></p>
<p><font color="gray" face="Arial Narrow" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; color: gray;">Fax: (+91-80)
4146 1055</span></font></p>
<p><font color="navy" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt; color: navy;"><a href="http://www.itforchange.net/" title="http://www.itforchange.net/" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
<em><i><font title="http://www.itforchange.net/" face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">www.ITforChange.net</span></font></i></em></a></span></font><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2">
<span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"> </span></font></p>
</div>
<div style="border-style: none none none solid; border-color: -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color blue; border-width: medium medium medium 1.5pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 4pt;">
<div>
<div style="text-align: center;" align="center"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">
<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%">
</span></font></div>
<p><b><font face="Tahoma" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Tahoma; font-weight: bold;">From:</span></font></b><font face="Tahoma" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Tahoma;"> Bertrand de La Chapelle
[mailto:<a href="mailto:bdelachapelle@gmail.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">bdelachapelle@gmail.com</a>] <br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Monday, June 11, 2007 7:37
PM<br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>;
Norbert Bollow<br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> [governance] IGF
financing</span></font></p>
</div><div><span class="e" id="q_1131b85ccdc768d2_1">
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"> </span></font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 12pt;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Dear all,<br>
<br>
Following the various post, including Norbert's one below, I'd like to insert
two general comments in the discussion :<br>
<br>
First, as the IGF is an innovative experiment in multi-stakeholder governance,
it would make sense that its funding be multi-stakeholder as well, wouldn't it
? Proportions can be discussed, given the variable contributory capacities, but
the principle would make sense, IMHO. <br>
<br>
Second, a combination of "automatic resources" for regular
activities, including the annual event and some secretariat functions, and
"had hoc resources" could also be envisaged, provided the later are
transparent. In particular, there is no reason to prevent some actors from
getting good visibility when they support some useful activity, such as funding
for participation of developing countries participants or supporting the
activities of a dynamic coalition. <br>
<br>
Best<br>
<br>
Bertrand<br>
<br>
<br>
</span></font></p>
<div>
<p><span><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">On 6/11/07, <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Norbert
Bollow</span></b> <<a href="mailto:nb@bollow.ch" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">nb@bollow.ch</a>> wrote:</span></font></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 12pt;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Milton Mueller</span></font>
<<a href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">mueller@syr.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> a) vested interests can be expected to use financial support as leverage<br>
> over the activities of the IGF<br>
><br>
> b) we need to find a way to institutionalize support for IGF that <br>
> minimizes this problem (we will never eliminate it)<br>
<br>
Would it be an improvement if the IGF process was funded out of<br>
the U.N. budget?<br>
<br>
If yes, what would be the process for trying to achieve that?<br>
<br>
What would be the chances of success for this?<br>
<br>
Greetings,<br>
Norbert.<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Norbert Bollow <<a href="mailto:nb@bollow.ch" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">nb@bollow.ch</a>> <a href="http://Norbert.ch" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://Norbert.ch </a><br>
President of the Swiss Internet User Group SIUG <a href="http://SIUG.ch" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://SIUG.ch</a></p>
</div>
<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br>
-- <br>
____________________<br>
Bertrand de La Chapelle<br>
<br>
Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32<br>
<br>
"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de
Saint Exupéry<br>
("there is no better mission for humans than uniting humans") </span></font></p>
</span></div></div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>____________________<br>Bertrand de La Chapelle<br><br>Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32<br><br>"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint Exupéry
<br>("there is no better mission for humans than uniting humans")