[governance] Reconstituting MAG

[Meryem Marzouki]

Le 19 févr. 08 à 08:40, Parminder a écrit :

[...]
> . We also agree that [Intergovernmental organizations having a  
> facilitating
> role in the coordination of Internet-related public policy issues and]
> International organizations having an important role in the  
> development of
> Internet-related technical standards and relevant policies should  
> continue
> to be represented in the MAG. However, their current over- 
> representation
> should be corrected.
>
> ( I personally suggest that the part within brackets be removed)

I can live with this removal, although mentioning them better  
identifies the "classic 3 UN stakeholders" vs. "ad hoc orgs", as well  
as it strengthens the reference to TA's wordings.

> And their views on Ian replacing the last sentence
>
> "However, their current over-representation should be corrected."
>
> With
>
> "However, their representation should not be at the expense of  
> broader civil
> society participation"

I prefer to mention the over-representation, but I'm also comfortable  
with Ian's formulation. Not really a big deal as for now, since there  
will be steps in the discussions: 1. tech org stakeholders or not  
stakeholders THEN 2. their number in MAG. And 1. is of highest  
importance, not only in the IGF context. This is urgent matter: OECD,  
as already mentioned, has also introduced this category. Huge  
lobbying is successful:( If we don't do anything, these orgs will  
soon have the status of IGOs in *all* fields!

Of course, I would prefer: "However, their current over- 
representation, at the expense of civil
society participation, should be corrected.", but I shouldn't be that  
greedy:)

Also, a minor detail in the first bullet point: can we add "only", to  
make things clearer, just in case:)
==> (taking into account Adam's important correction on figures)
. There are only seven civil society members at present in a MAG of  
46, an
anomaly which should be corrected in this round of rotation of members.
We think that as per Tunis Agenda’s multi-stakeholder approach,  
membership
should be divided equally among governments, civil society and the  
business
sector.

instead of:
. There are seven civil society members at present in a MAG of 40, an
anomaly which should be corrected in this round of rotation of members.
We think that as per Tunis Agenda’s multi-stakeholder approach,  
membership
should be divided equally among governments, civil society and the  
business
sector.

Finally, I'm still of the opinion that suggesting numbers for tech  
orgs would be counter-productive at this step.

Best,
Meryem

____________________________________________________________
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