[governance] bureau yes bureau no???

[Carlos Afonso]

I agree with Milton that a "bureau" or something similar (which could 
have a different name) may not do what he says it would "normally" (?) do.

Secondly, we at the caucus started discussing the possible need for a 
bureau (latu sensu, please) some time ago, independently of any 
government proposal.

Finally, I would like to quote from the statement of the Brazilian 
representative today at the consultation (which is in the transcripts 
available at the IGF's site):

"Now, if we see the IGF as a process that started in Athens and
is aimed at the last meeting four years from now, and we -- I think it 
is understood that it requires each time a certain fine-tuning or 
refinement of its agenda, of its format, of its structure and process. 
So one of the refinements that perhaps is needed for this next meeting 
in Rio is the establishment of a structure that would support the 
chairman of the IGF in conducting the meeting. Now, as you said, the 
Advisory Group is to provide advice to the Secretary-General in 
organizing the meeting.  And that's perfect. But who, then, will help 
the chairman in conducting the meeting? So the Advisory Group had a 
fundamental role in preparing for Athens, and its work is commendable 
for the success of the Athens meeting.  But it had at the same time no 
role at all during the Athens meeting. So one possibility that we 
perceive as becoming a strong demand is the possibility of having some 
sort of conclusion or report of the meeting, which is, of course, 
understood to be nonbinding because of the nature of IGF itself.  As in 
many other international fora, there is always the possibility of, for 
instance, a chairman's report.  But the chairman alone would not have 
the required legitimacy to prepare such a report without the help of a
representative, multistakeholder, and regionally balanced group. So how 
do we call such group?  Friends of the chair?  Bureau?  Supporting 
committee? I think that there are many options. What we believe is that 
we need to have this kind of support.  Otherwise, the chairman alone 
will not be able to deliver to the expectations that are already created 
by the international community. So we would encourage very much that in 
this preparatory process, we further discuss this necessity, which we 
believe is vital to the proper conduct of business in Rio and in 
subsequent meetings."

In my view, unless the caucus agrees to the IGF not producing reports, 
recommendations etc (contrary to what the Tunis agenda recommends BTW), 
some form of hands-on support is needed, and this is not the role of the 
MAG.

--c.a.

Raul Echeberria wrote:
> At 04:34 p.m. 23/05/2007, Milton Mueller wrote:
> 
>> --- 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 agree with Milton
> Good point.
> 
> But, beside that, what is the problem that the bureau could solve.
> I see the proposal of the bureau as a complain from some governments to 
> have more participation.
> They have not adapted themselves to the innovative format of IGF.
> 
> While I am open to consider new things, like the bureau, the origin of 
> the proposal makes me think that it will not be something good for civil 
> society.
> 
> If the problem is the representation of civil society in the AG or the 
> structure of that group, we should focus in this issue.
> 
> Raúl
> 
> 
> 
>> 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
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/815 - Release Date: 
>> 22/05/2007 03:49 p.m.
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 
> 
> 

-- 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Carlos A. Afonso
diretor de planejamento
Rede de Informações para o Terceiro Setor - Rits
http://www.rits.org.br
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

____________________________________________________________
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