[governance] What could happen this morning in subcom A

[Izumi AIZU]

I also agree with Jeanette and Wolfgang for their observations.
It puts too much power to governments, so vauge about the relation
between existing institution and new cooperation "model".

That is why Iran and others showed considerable interest (but
they also have reservations, too).

In the mean time, I chatted breifly with the Chair at the break
and he said it is too early to have working group.

I think using this time, we need to prepare our position statement,
to be read at the beginning of next SubCom A - 6 pm. Though
there is likely to be the drafting meeting during lunch time and
3 - 6 pm.

izumi

At 11:14 05/09/29 +0200, Wolfgang Kleinw臘hter wrote:
>I agree with Jeanettes observation that the EU Proposal risks to 
>open the door for a too detailed and heavy governmental cloud over 
>the day-to-day operations. While 64 (introduction) limits the 
>activities to "the level of principles", the following subpoints a. 
>to e. are an invitation to leave this level downwards.
>
>If you remember the .eu nighmare you sould be warned about the 
>practical consequences of such an approach. If a. to e. is a 
>bargaining chip, it is fine. Question remains, is the critical mass 
>which is grouping behind 64, big enough to move US and China?
>
>Wolfgang
>
>
>
>________________________________
>
>Von: governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Jeanette Hofmann
>Gesendet: Do 29.09.2005 10:59
>An: Vittorio Bertola
>Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Betreff: Re: [governance] What could happen this morning in subcom A
>
>
>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?
>
>http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/pc3/working/dt14rev2.doc
>
>I had brief chat with an experienced participant this morning. He
>expressed his surprise about the EU proposal. Considering the fact that
>the EU tries to express the middle ground, their proposal is too
>detailed, too government-centred ("too french") and obviously not
>coordinated with US. "As the Austrians would say, the US did not even
>ignore the EU proposal."
>
>The latest compilation of comments on the chair's paper still has the
>first version of our statement on para 62. This is very unfortunate. We
>completed our new version yesterday evening because we wanted to get it
>included in the new compilation as distributed this morning.
>
>jeanette
>
>
>
>Vittorio Bertola wrote:
> > Rumours are that Khan might let delegations comment the different
> > proposals for section 5 (i.e. forum + oversight), then adjourn the session
> > and reconvene it as a drafting group on section 5, chaired by himself. If
> > this happens, we will be confronted with the option of sitting silently,
> > or trying to speak and possibly be sent out.
> >
> > In any case, Jeanette is making our statement right now, so we've spoken;
> > but, in light of the possibilities that these WSIS rules of procedure are
> > adopted also for the forum, I am wondering whether we should not set
> > continued precedents of exclusion, so to continue raising the issue until
> > we get better treatment, or confront them with the risk of civil society
> > (and perhaps private sector) not supporting the forum due to its
> > dissatisfaction with actual possibilities for participation. I do not want
> > to take excessive action, but this needs some careful strategic thinking
> > in the near future.
> >
> > Getting back to Khan, another rumour is that he might come up with his own
> > attempt to merge existing proposals into a common text to start
> > discussions.
>_______________________________________________
>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

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