[bestbits] Best Bits MAG nominations for your approval - URGENT

[parminder]

On Monday 02 December 2013 07:28 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> On 2 Dec 2013, at 9:46 pm, genekimmelman at gmail.com 
> <mailto:genekimmelman at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> To be more specific,  maybe those with lingering concerns need to 
>> decide whether they want to participate on the best bits platform or 
>> not. You decide.  If you think you can make it work better,  please 
>> offer ideas like Anriette, Michael and others have done. I believe we 
>> decided in Bali on an approach and I endorse Anriette's path toward 
>> formalizing this. And I suggest we wrap up this conversation for now 
>> and move on to substance.  Otherwise we delegitimze the broad support 
>> people worked towards over two days in Bali and make it more 
>> difficult to prepare for Brazil.
>
> Or, those for whom it is a priority for us to work on internal 
> processes could take that task on themselves, by developing a proposed 
> set of procedures that they would be happy with.  In fact, please do - 
> that could actually be really helpful and be a more useful division of 
> labour.

Jeremy,

Since you ask...

My preferred option is to make BB into a membership based organisation. 
My impression at its inaugural meeting was that it was supposed to 
emerge as a membership based body, where serious and committed civil 
society organisations/ individuals will like to work together in peace 
and with focus, away from the general din of civil society conversations.

Very roughly and in brief...

1, It can have specific membership criteria, to ensure effective 
working, representation, and so on... to see it remains really and 
effectively civil society ......

2, Preferably a basic charter with statement of vision/ mission, 
objectives and activities is written (it may take time, and get written 
as we go, as long as a decision is taken)

3, Consensus, rough consensus, polling etc processes to be evolved and 
coded to assess the views of members on various issues .

4, A small -4-5 member steering committee to be elected by the 
membership will to do routine tasks ( a two co- coordinator model can be 
used or  a hybrid between the two) , and  other tasks that may be 
decided in the charter, and by the membership from time to time. This 
will include representing BB network to others, but with keeping the 
group very closely posted about all things, helping the membership chose 
reps through nomcoms, online polling etc.. and so on..

5, The committee/ co-cos will have a strong disciplinary role so that 
the space does not get rigged to be made ineffective, or otherwise 
spoiled... This power would of course be subject to appeal.....

However, if some people insist that BB is  just  a neutral platform and 
should remain as one, and it only facilitates voluntary cooperation and 
voluntary common action by civil society groups/ individuals who want to 
do so, then

BB  can/ should only :

1. provide an open discussion forum, where over discussion people can 
work out positions to work further together on, and/ or take action 
together on, whereby they move the issue to discuss further among those 
who want to cooperate in this manner.

2. Host an online tool to put out statements which are open to signed by 
anyone, and then delivered (strictly) in the name of the signing 
organisation. Nowhere the name of BB is mentioned in these statements 
because any such mention just gives the impression to outsiders that it 
is a BB statement, which is a mis- representation.

Since a platform represents no one (a statement also made recently by 
Jeremy) it cannot be represented by anyone for any substantive purpose, 
including by the steering committee. It has to forgo all such tasks 
(well, people can still issue joint statements proposing anything, 
including their - but not BB's - joint reps or nominees and so )

This is my understanding about the difference between a membership based 
organisation (which derives its legitimacy from its members) and  a 
member-less platform which has merely a facilitating function (and thus 
has no 'substantive legitimacy' since there is no one to give it 
legitimacy)

The above is a rather rough and indicative text and there would be many 
gaps in it.....

So, BB can either be a membership based body or it can be just a neutral 
facilitating platform, but cant be shifting between two as per 
convenience of some - take up substantive tasks with assumed legitimacy 
as if it were a membership based body, and then when process question 
are asked - to ensure processes so that membership views are 
appropriately gathered and conveyed - take up the defence that BB is 
just a neutral platform...

And if there are some real hybrid options, then lets discuss them as well...

It is not necessary to agree on everything right now, and have charter, 
processes etc all ready right now - suspending substantive work till we 
have everything. Not at all.... We need to just try and form a broad 
agreement on overall form, and corresponding implications for processes 
and substantive docs etc. We can then begin giving it concrete shape 
without disturbing the current pace of work, which the current 
arrangement can keeping taking care or....


parminder

>
> -- 
>
> *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.
>
> *WARNING*: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly 
> recommended to enable PGP or S/MIME encryption at your end. For 
> instructions, see http://jere.my/l/8m.
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131202/b4f93676/attachment.htm>