<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000066" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<br>
<br>
On Monday 11 October 2010 11:45 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4FCE6895-ACD0-4B05-A37F-C3C02CF8989B@ciroap.org"
type="cite"><b><span class="Apple-style-span"
style="font-weight: normal;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span"
style="font-weight: normal;"><b><b><span class="Apple-style-span"
style="font-weight: normal;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span"
style="font-weight: normal;"><b>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><u>It
is
important that regional meetings play a more important role in IGF
agenda-setting and issue-framing. The discussions that take place
during the meetings, if summarized in an objectively and timely manner,
could represent real regional contributions to the process.</u></span><b><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><b><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><b>
<div style="font-weight: normal; display: inline ! important;"><b><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><b><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><b>
<div style="display: inline ! important;"><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><b><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><b><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><b>
<div style="font-weight: normal; display: inline ! important;"><u> The
outcomes
of regional meetings should also serve to better clarify and
sharpen discussions, reducing the complexity of themes into concrete
issues to be addressed at the IGF.</u></div>
</b></span></b></span></b></span></div>
</b></span></b></span></b></div>
</b></span></b></span></b></div>
<div><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><b><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><b>
<div style="font-weight: normal; display: inline ! important;"><b><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><b><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><b>
<div style="display: inline ! important;"><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><b><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><b><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><b>
<div style="font-weight: normal; display: inline ! important;"><br>
</div>
</b></span></b></span></b></span></div>
</b></span></b></span></b></div>
</b></span></b></span></b></div>
</b></span></b></span></b></b></span></b></span></b></blockquote>
<br>
Before we seek a more formal role for regional meetings (which ones??)
in IGF agenda setting and issue framing we need to convince ourselves
about what we are talking about here. Can any group get up and say,
hey, we are the regional IGF meeting holder, and the outcomes of that
meeting are then seen , as we propose here, to have a higher validity
in IGF agenda setting and issue framing. As i have said it earlier,
with all due respect to those you did all the hard work, this is kind
of what happened in the case of Asia regional IGF (which I did attend
under protest, clearly informing the organisers that I will attend only
if I am allowed to make the point regarding how i consider the whole
process of organsing the Asia IGF problematic, which I then did speak
about at the meeting).<br>
<br>
As much as I know about the Latin American process, I very much welcome
regional IGFs getting more prominence if they are held on that LA
model. And if so held, they indeed both greatly increase participation,
and give much better time and space for a more reasoned consideration
of issues key to the particular region.<br>
<br>
Before, or at least at the same time as, we recommend a more formal
role for outcomes of regional IGFs in the global IGF, we need to
mention the minimum basic conditions for what can be considered a
regional IGF meeting for this purpose. For instance, the nature of its
organizing committee, complete transparency of funding mechanisms,
availability of support for CS groups to attend, the process of
managing and allocating this funding support, clarity on mechanism by
which the agenda issues and/ or 'messages' from these meetings are
brought to the IGF etc............ These things need to be written in
our response before we recommend that these meetings me given higher
legitimacy in IGF agenda framing. <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>