[governance] What could happen this morning in subcom A

[William Drake]

Hi Jeanette,

> [mailto:governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org]On Behalf Of Jeanette Hofmann

> Hi, we might have another opportunity to speak in the next subcommittee
> meeting tonight.
> My suggestion would be to have a look at the contributions from
> Argentina and the EU on para 62. These contributions seem to be regarded
> the most relevant ones. What do others think, should we comment on these
> proposals?

The Argentines just say let's have a forum, which is all but a done deal,
just have to see how much of a pain the US will be in final negotiations. 
The EU is more interesting, and this is part of why I wasn't comfortable
with our statement already saying flat out no change other than internal
ICANN reform.  The EU fancies itself as carving out the middle ground
between the US and the Iranians, but their proposal is very vague, and
when I've pressed them on this, they've insisted that this is
strategically the smart thing to do---don't really specify the model, just
invoke principles (I think it's really that they don't have internal
consensus yet, so this is all they can do, but they don't want to admit
it).  Well, now we've had Brazil, India, China, Iran, and others get up
and basically say hey your model is vague, please explain.  Doh!

The EU says under its "new model"

-we should not replace existing mechanisms or institutions, but should
build on the existing structures of with a special emphasis on the
complementarity between all the actors, each in its field of competence;-

-the role of governments in the new cooperation model should be mainly
focused on principle issues of public policy, excluding any involvement in
the day-to-day operations;

-the model should include the development and application of globally
applicable public policy principles and provide an international
government involvement at the level of principles over naming, numbering
and addressing-related matters:

You might join the others in asking for clarification, in particular:

1. in what organizational form do they suggest "building on existing," if
they're calling it new---if they don't want the Iranian Council, what do
they want (answer is GAC made an IGO but they're shy);
2. in suggesting that governments should focus on these principles, what
would be the roles of other stakeholders in that process;
3. if the answer to 2) is just advisory, ask why CS and the private sector
should greet this as a proposed improvement over the status quo.

Thanks,

Bill

PS: Did Veni just get up and say something about sheep?  Maybe the webcast
was garbled...



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