[governance] Programme outline and schedule released

[Adam Peake]

At 8:39 AM +0200 5/2/07, William Drake wrote:
>Hi,
>


<snip>



>I don't think the texts on the four themes have been collated before, so
>I've done so below.  Maybe it'd make sense to tweak them collectively for
>overall coherence etc.  The first one is a lot longer than the others, if
>that matters, and the framing/formatting is variable.


Bill, thanks.


>Cheers,
>
>Bill
>--------


I think it may take while to agree on exact wording (if ever :-) but 
this is very helpful.  I don't think we need to wait to get agreement 
on all these ideas and should send a simple statement about core 
resources as soon as possible.

<more snipped>


>
>(2) ICANN and Core Internet Resources


Add a sentence at the beginning to say (something along the lines of)

Thank you for posting draft programme outline and meeting schedule 
for the Rio de Janeiro IGF and providing the opportunity to comment. 
The IGC's initial response is


>Core Internet resources should be discussed as a main session in the
>IGF. Policy toward "critical Internet resources" are a major topic  in
>the Tunis Agenda and the mandate for the IGF.

adding:

A clear intention of the IGF was to facilitate discussion of such 
issues, every consultation has heard comments from many different 
stakeholders requesting such discussion. We request the draft 
programme prepared for the May 23rd consultation include critical 
Internet resources as the theme of a "main session".

Signed by our two coordinators and sent.


I don't see how this can be controversial.  Consistent with 
everything the caucus has agreed since WGIG (perhaps before.)


I don't agree with the following part of the draft on core resources 
so would not send it. Needs more discussion.  But I think we do agree 
that "critical Internet resources" should be the topic of a main 
session, so let's say that now.



>Currently, name and
>number resources are administered by ICANN and the Regional Internet
>Registries. This session should discuss the policy issues and policy
>making processes in these institutions. In particular, ICANN's  status
>as an international organization, its representation of individual
>users, and the changing role of the  GAC within ICANN should be
>discussed.
>



Above is too specific, I would not like to see a main session 
discussing ICANN, individual users in ICANN, GAC or anything so 
narrow.  For discussion in a workshop is fine.  Main session, waste 
of time.  ICANN is minute detail, simply isn't important enough.  In 
my personal opinion.

Thanks,

Adam



>(3) Global Internet policies impacting access to and effective use of the
>Internet by disadvantage people and groups - The development agenda in IG
>
>"Under the general theme of access, we would like to have a plenary session
>devoted to the topic, how can global Internet governance policies and
>practices have an impact on disadvantaged peoples' access to, and effective
>use of, the Internet and their access to knowledge? This panel would try to
>identify and explore the specific policies, institutional mechanisms,
>resource allocation processes, property rights regimes and financing
>mechanisms that are international in scope and can have a real affect on
>access to, and effective use of, the Internet."
>
>
>(4) role and mandate of IGF
>
>The Tunis Agenda mandated that the IGF should, inter alia, facilitate
>discourse between bodies dealing with different cross-cutting international
>public policies and issues that do not fall within the scope of any existing
>body; interface with appropriate inter-governmental organizations and other
>institutions on matters under their purview;  identify emerging issues,
>bring them to the attention of the relevant bodies and the general public,
>and, where appropriate, make recommendations; and promote and assess, on an
>ongoing basis, the embodiment of WSIS principles in Internet governance
>processes. Since these critically important, value-adding functions cannot
>be performed by any existing Internet governance mechanism, nor by annual
>conferences built around plenary presentations from invited speakers, the
>purpose of this panel would be to foster an open and inclusive dialogue on
>how the IGF could fulfill these and other elements of its mandate.
>
>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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

____________________________________________________________
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