[governance] IGF public consultation

[Parminder]

Hi Jeanette

I did send out an email on the 29th asking for any issues that members may
want raised and myself presented some views in how things stood vis a vis
preparation for Rio. I know it was kind of late but there has been too much
silence on the IGC lately, a situation which despite some efforts by me and
some others did not change much. For instance, we need discussions on the
issue of the UN communiqué raising issues of rotation, transparency etc in
IGF and MAG, and of giving the issue new consideration after Rio. Bertrand
made the very useful suggestion on IGC taking a proactive stance on giving
new definitions and recommendations etc... 

I think statements can only come if such discussions are taken forward...

I also asked those members of IGC which were to be present on the 3rd in
Geneva to discuss a possible meeting so that if necessary some kind of
statement could be read out, after collectively determining that it is in
consonance with the known views of IGC... but no one responded...

On the other hand I think APC's input addressed the main issue very well -
that of the revision/ reform of the MAG /IGF, including issues of rotation
of members, nomination of new members by stakeholders themselves, and of the
governmental co-chair.. And IT for Change and some others supported the
statement. And also added the point of transparency of MAG and flow of
information and gave some concrete suggestion.. I have a feeling that the
suggestion for a meeting report of the closed sessions may be accepted since
Nitin responded quite well to it. This will also specifically address the
concern raised in the UN SG's communiqué. 

I think APC statement plus these other points could safely have been adopted
as the caucus statement, but for this (1) we need some activity on the IGC
prior to such meetings and (2) more liberty to those present to judge the
'perspectives of the IGC' and make a statement 'on their feet'. In this
case, as an additional factor which worked against a pre-prepared statement,
the agenda for the consultation was itself circulated too late (if I am
right)...

The other two issues that took a great amount of the time, with most
contributions for the technical and business community (on these issues, MAG
members from these groups spoke most of the time, when as Anriette observed
in her statement they should have focused more on listening), were

(1) why the session on CIR should of a very different quality than other
sessions

(2) what are the problems with a recommendation giving power for IGF

Both these issues are such on which a statement on behalf of the IGC could
only be made on the after a good amount of online discussions, if so.

So hoping for more life on the IGC list :)

Parminder 


 



________________________________________________
Parminder Jeet Singh
IT for Change, Bangalore
Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities 
Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890
Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055
www.ITforChange.net 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeanette Hofmann [mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2007 2:05 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: [governance] IGF public consultation
> 
> Hi, in case you didn't notice there was no caucus statement yesterday.
> While the business sector had interventions on almost every issue on the
> agenda, the caucus didn't have a single one. There were only
> contributions by ICT for Change, APC, some other organizations and a few
> individuals. This is a missed opportunity to influence the discussion on
> the further institutionalization of the IGF. It also makes the role of
> cs people in the advisory group more difficult. We have less papers and
> interventions to refer to in the advisory group meeting than other
> stakeholders.
> jeanette
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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