[governance] igc at igf consultations

[Adam Peake]

The February statement was read out, it's in the transcript.  I don't 
know if it was sent in time before the meeting to become part of the 
official record and be considered in the secretariat's summary of 
submitted comments. It's not on the February meeting contributions 
page <http://www.intgovforum.org/contributions_Feb_2007_cons.htm>

The recent document is listed on the May 23rd meeting page 
<http://www.intgovforum.org/contributions_May_2007_cons.htm>

Adam


>Vittorio Bertola wrote:
>
>>If the caucus can't manage to approve something new on Wednesday, 
>>also reprinting our statement from February (which, I'm quite sure, 
>>was not circulated in writing) could help. It already had a number 
>>of points on workshops etc, though it did not address explicitly 
>>the "bureau" idea since it had not come up yet.
>
>I recall the effort that went into agreeing it but not what happened 
>afterwards.  I had assumed our coordinators sent it to the 
>secretariat and that it'd been circulated in print. What was the 
>point of sweating it out, then?
>
>Should we extract and redate the parts on modalities and send it as 
>a second statement this time?
>
>BD
>____________________________________________________________
>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