[governance] Discussing the Agenda for Rio in Geneva

[Jeremy Malcolm]

Parminder wrote:
> My point of departure for this is the strong sense that the existing
> governance structure of IGF has taken a certain attitude (which is very very
> political, in my view, and not just administrative though that's how it may
> be passed off) that IGF is to be, more or less, an annual IG conference.
> George Sadowsky's comments (and he is a special advisor to the chair) are
> quite forthright on this issue, and he has cited the 'general feeling' in
> the IGF governance structure and not just his own views. 
> 
> To substantiate his assertion, one only has to note the drift of the
> synthesis paper prepared by the IGF for this meeting. While the paper does a
> good work of putting different views together, it does betray the mind of
> the present IGF governance structure on this issue(As Jeremy has noted).
> Very strangely, it seems to, in a way, give legitimacy to the view that the
> Tunis agenda mandated only a 'discussion forum' task for IGF, and anything
> else will mean going beyond the Tunis agenda.

The writing was on the world earlier than that.  I have just been going 
back over the transcripts of the last public consultations, and I came 
across this gem of an exchange between Brazil and Nitin Desai from May:

BRAZIL: Even though we are not going to take decisions in the forum --- 
that's why we are calling it a forum --- we can have recommendations. 
... Non-binding recommendations, but it would be recommendations ... we 
are going to send back, I suppose, to the Secretary-General of the 
United Nations, and then these recommendations can be delivered to 
specific bodies that takes decisions on matters. Then my suggestion, Mr 
Chairman, then we have ... panels, groups, study groups in between, as 
many as we want, as we decide, as the group decides. Each one producing 
recommendations on a consensus basis. Of course there will be no votes. 
Recommendations goes back to the last plenary, and then we approve, and 
we are ready to go ....

DESAI: Consensus between 500 participants from multiple sectors groups. 
I will put it to the advisory group. It's an interesting thought. I will 
put it to them and see how they feel about it.

-- 
Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com
Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor
host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}'
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance