[bestbits] Programme for Best Bits annual meeting

[parminder]

Thanks to the steering committee for this great start....

I havent much to say about day 1. Maybe a few things, but that later...

Abut day 2

I think we would do well if we try not to look very ITU centric ( and I 
can assure, we do)... Last year was different with the WCIT in the 
offing, but this year I dont see why a session should focus on ITU.

As to saying that Snowden or NSA revelations can become a sub item of 
this ITU discussion, quite the opposite is what I think would be in order..

Lets be honest, and do justice to the people of the world in whose name 
we assemble, work and expend monies.... Internet governance to the world 
right now is completely focussed on the Snowden affair. Not only among 
the laity, but even the politically well informed and articulate.

It is bad enough that the IGF wont largely be about NSA revelations 
(even to the extent that Kenya IGF was about the India's CIRP proposal) 
although I will be happy to be pleasantly surprised. But I cant see how 
a civil society meeting can afford to be not about it. This is my basic 
proposition..

I think we need to have a session on something very roughly like the 
'The global Internet after Snowden - What will balkanise the Internet 
and what can keep it sufficiently global' - and if possible come out 
with a statement about it.

At the time of formation of BB, we had promised ourselves a positive 
agenda , and flogging ITU over a day once again is not what I think 
takes us towards that. (Disclaimer: I have long held that the ITU is not 
the right place for most global IG work.)

People are interested to know in which directions would post Snowden 
global Internet go. And we should discuss this.

Lets cut the chaff and go directly to what is/ are the issue(s) of 
global governance of the Internet today. For instance - what are the 
global ethics, norms, principles and legal frameworks for trans-border 
flow of data, information and digital services? Who should develop ( 
ensure their compliance) and how?

And wh- at is the meaning of ownership of our digital lives, and how 
statist and corporatist controls play with such rightful ownership.

That is what people right now most want to know... Do we have anything 
to say to them, and perhaps say on the behalf of them?

parminder




On Saturday 10 August 2013 09:06 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> Since the good news that the 2013 IGF will be going ahead after all, 
> it's time to revise and finalise the programme for our annual meeting 
> in Bali.  The interim steering group has been talking about this, and 
> here was their suggestion for topics (the descriptions are mine though):
>
> *Day 1*
>
> 1) Best Bits itself: goals, structure, processes, fundraising, 
> interactions with other groups, etc. The interim steering group is 
> working on a documents with our brainstorming about all this, which we 
> will share soon.  The purpose of this session is to reach a consensus 
> that we are heading in the right direction (or not), and to provide a 
> mandate to carry out proposals that will help us grow and become 
> stronger and more sustainable.
>
> 2) Global Internet governance principles and Enhanced Cooperation.  As 
> you know, there are groups at the IGF MAG and the CSTD discussing 
> these issues, but until now there has been no strong unified civil 
> society position about the evolution of Internet governance 
> arrangements, and this equivocation has played into the wrong hands. 
>  We have been largely split between groups that are averse to any 
> changes, and those with proposals for changes that are seen as 
> radical.  The purpose of this session (as I see it, anyway) is to get 
> together behind a shared position that can become a solid base for 
> advocacy.  We already have a working group arguing over these issues 
> (in a good way), which will report back to this main list soon.
>
> *Day 2*
>
> 3) The ITU processes, up to the ITU Plenipotentiary in 2014 and the 
> WSIS+10 review.  What is coming up?  What is our long term strategy? 
>  Have we responded adequately to the ITU's most recent refusal to open 
> up the Council Working Group on Internet Policy to stakeholders?  If 
> we still don't see change at the Plenipotentiary, what then - do we 
> disengage?
>
> 4) The NSA surveillance issue may become a sub-item of the ITU 
> discussion, given that there are countries that may bring this debate 
> to the ITU. But it will also include an update on the Human Rights 
> Council, stateside developments, how this has altered the Internet 
> governance landscape in the long term, and general strategy going forward.
>
> There's also a lot of other work to be done between now and then, 
> including work on the website (so that you can actually register for 
> the meeting!) and on fundraising (to help pay for it).  I'll be 
> posting more about that very soon.
>
> Meanwhile your comments are invited on the programme...
>
> -- 
>
> *Dr Jeremy Malcolm
> Senior Policy Officer
> Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers*
> Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East
> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, 
> Malaysia
> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
>
> Explore our new Resource Zone - the global consumer movement knowledge 
> hub | http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/resource-zone
>
> @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org 
> <http://www.consumersinternational.org> | 
> www.facebook.com/consumersinternational 
> <http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational>
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice 
> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't 
> print this email unless necessary.
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20130811/fde5d7d0/attachment.htm>