[governance] proposed drafting groups

[Danny Butt]

Well that's interesting. But what happens if (say) the public policy  
issues and the work of group 3 is not aligned? It also seems to me  
that the "development" area will end up having little leverage on  
outcomes, as all the implementable action looks to be in group 3 (and  
some of 1).

having read the document, my suggestions for an expanded description  
of Civil Society's role seem out of place, so apologies. It looks  
like it should just be one sentence. Actually, I can't quite tell  
what Part Two is doing in the Chair's document if the stakeholders  
have already been defined elsewhere? Couldn't the whole thing be  
taken out entirely?

Cheers,

Danny

On 23/09/2005, at 8:44 PM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote:

> Amb Khan has now proposed 3 drafting groups to be set up:
>
> Drafting group 1: Part 1 (introduction), Part 2 (stakeholders),  
> Part 3b
> (public policy issues related to the use of the Internet)
> Drafting group 2: Part 4 (Development)
> Drafting group 3: Part 3a (Infrastructure, Management), Part 5  
> (Follow up)
>
>
> Governments are asked to comment on this proposal monday. So, nothing
> will happen until then. Now, if that isn't an efficient procedure...
> jeanette
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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