[governance] bureau yes bureau no???

[Milton Mueller]

--- William Drake <drake at hei.unige.ch> wrote:
> Perhaps some talking past each other here.  Yes, in the
> morning meeting, we said "the caucus has no position" 
> on the renewed bureau suggestions.
> However, it is also true that the caucus has previously
> affirmed support for the mAG approach as opposed to 
> a bureau---and make no mistake, they are
> understood by all as opposites (but of course we have also
> criticized the way the mAG concept has been implemented).

I am not privy to the floor discussions but wish to make it clear that
if "Bureau" means distinct silos into which governments, business and
civil society retreat, and a WSIS-like arrangement in which the
govermental bureau is "more equal" than the others, then the Bureau
proposal is a step backwards that should not be taken. (it may however
be possible for a bureau to not do that.)

I also think that, with respect to the controversy between McTim et al,
we have to trust the people on the floor, and particularly our caucus
co-coordinators, to take appropriate action while there. Otherwise the
caucus will be crippled as an effective force. We have mechanisms to
hold our officers accountable if they abuse the latitude. 

A significant amount of the complaints about IGC actions are, in my
opinion, motivated by an attempt to keep the caucus from doing
anything.

____________________________________________________________
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