[governance] some points

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

I agree with this approach.  I think it would be good to get  
agreement on as many of the main points as we can and to create a  
speaking points document that the coordinators and those present  
could use to come up with quick responses, that would not need  
explicit prior caucus consensus if we were presented with some new  
proposal to react to.   Obviously if there was some new concept for  
which there was no 'brief' then we would still need to return to the  
caucus for prior discussion.

As the process stands at the moment, no one can say something on  
behalf of the caucus without first getting the caucus to approve the  
specific statement.

Of course that means we should be sure we have agreed to as much as  
possible before the continuation of the prepcom.

i also think we need to work out something with the chair that allows  
civil society to make statements that have not been presented several  
hours in advance to the secretariat.  i.e at the end of the  
governments comment they should always ask if there are any other  
stakeholder comments, so that we could raise the flag and be recognized.

a.


On 1 okt 2005, at 11.38, Izumi AIZU wrote:

> So the game goes on...
>
> Now I just like to leave some points here before forgetting so.
>
> One of the challenges for our caucus during this prepcom is
> to make effective interventions. The Chair gave more speaking
> slots than we had originaly anticipated. And we are placed
> to respond to some new developments, ie to some new proposal
> or to the situation of their discussion.
>
> It was so hard to react to these since we needed general consensus
> both from those in Geneva, who are often scattered, and also those
> who are participating from remote places to the list and watching
> the webcast.
>
> It might be easier, we felt in the end, that we can establish some
> kind of general framework and mandate under which a number
> of us could act as a focal point or liaison persons to quickly
> summarize the situation, make short interventions, with the
> previously agreed framework on substantive issues.
> Now that we have exchanged many views here on this list,
> and also various interaction at CS Content and Theme groups
> I think we have a general common position or at least understanding
> of what we can safely say on behalf of CS and our caucus.
>
> Of course,there are certain areas and issues that we do not have
> clear consensus and have very different standpoints, I think that
> is natural and not negative, but we can be carefully confine
> our interventions to avoid stepping into these touchy areas and
> still making good impacts.
>
> Well, we don't know yet where and when the resumed Prepcom
> will be taken place. Either Geneva or Tunis, and the modality
> of how much we can effectively participate. But in any case
> I think this is worth to consider.
>
> I am sure we have more lessons and ideas, but now we also need
> some rest.
>
> Thank you for all the efforts here and there. I think we have
> achieved a reasonably good collaboration and some, if not that
> big, impact to the overall process.
>
> izumi
>
> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>
>

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance