[governance] Reconstituting MAG - FINAL(?) the missing
Adam Peake
ajp at glocom.ac.jp
Fri Feb 22 22:57:50 EST 2008
No, I do not support stating there are three
stakeholders or reference to the Tunis Agenda.
I'd also like to see where this proposed text
would fit within the full draft. Too confusing
with too many different drafts flying around.
Would be better to keep documents whole as
possible.
Ian, the last version I think you're basing changes on read:
[start]
* We think that 40 is a good number for MAG
members. One third of MAG members should be
rotated every year.
* In the interest of transparency and
understanding the responsibilities of MAG
members, when making appointments to the MAG we
ask the Secretary General to explain which
interested group that person is associated with.
* Civil society has been under represented in the
multi-stakeholder advisory groups appointed in
2006 and 2007, this anomaly should be corrected
in this round of rotation and a fair balance of
members between all stakeholders assured. At
least one quarter of the MAG membership must be
drawn from Civil Society. Fair civil society
representation is necessary to ensure legitimacy
for this new experiment in global governance.
[all the stuff about numbers deleted]
* Stakeholder representatives should be chosen
based on appropriate processes of self-selection
by stakeholder groups. We do appreciate that it
is difficult to recognize any one stakeholder
entity, or even a given set of them, as
completely representing the whole of that
particular stakeholder group. This complicates
the process of selection, especially in the case
of civil society and business sectors, and makes
for some scope for the final selecting authority
exercising a degree of judgment. This, however,
should be done in a completely transparent
manner. Deviations from the self-selection
processes of stakeholder groups should be kept to
the minimum. [some words deleted from the end of
the last sentence, think they were too much to
demand]
* When recommending members of the MAG all
stakeholders should ensure diversity in terms of
gender, geography, and, where applicable, special
interest groups. [some change to wording]
[no comments on other stakeholders, just focus on CS]
[end]
So. Yes, happy with deleting "At least one
quarter..." etc from the third paragraph.
In your version are we keeping "We think 40 is a
good number..." etc? And keeping the paragraph
"* Stakeholder representatives should be
chosen..." etc ? Milton thinks it should be as
small as possible, something to that effect could
easily be added. (small, nibble, effective, while
large enough to enure the diversity of interests
are represented. Not more than 40...)
For the other two paragraphs it seems you're
reverting to Parminder's earlier draft and I have
the same problems with them now as I did a few
days ago.
And as we're all subscribed to the caucus list there's no need to cc.
Adam
>EEK - a couple of offline comments make it clear to me that para 2 will not
>ride because of confusion around the word stakeholder.
>
>In which case I would revert to "We think that as per Tunis Agenda¹s
>multi-stakeholder approach, governments, civil society and the business
>sector should be represented equally." for the second paragraph. I think we
>have lost McTim while he gets some sleep, but he prefers that to my previous
>wording and I hope will find it acceptable.
>
>We now have
>
>The rules for membership of the MAG, including in terms of representation of
>different stakeholders, should be clearly established, and made open along
>with due justifications. Full civil society representation is necessary to
>ensure legitimacy for this new experiment in global governance.
>
>[We think that as per Tunis Agenda¹s multi-stakeholder approach,
>governments, civil society and the business sector should be represented
>equally]
>
>We also agree that the organizations having an important role in Internet
>administration and the development of Internet-related technical standards
>should continue to be represented in the MAG.
>However, their representation should not be at the expense of broader civil
>society participation.
>
>Ian Peter
>Ian Peter and Associates Pty Ltd
>PO Box 10670 Adelaide St Brisbane 4000
>Australia
>Tel (+614) 1966 7772 or (+612) 6687 0773
>www.ianpeter.com
>www.internetmark2.org
>www.nethistory.info
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com]
>Sent: 23 February 2008 07:45
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; 'McTim'
>Cc: 'Adam Peake'; 'Parminder'
>Subject: RE: [governance] Reconstituting MAG - FINAL(?) the missing section
>
>Here is what McTim and I have agreed on as a formulation.(which is a pretty
>good start!!) Can we get a few yeahs?
>
>The rules for membership of the MAG, including in terms of representation of
>different stakeholders, should be clearly established, and made open along
>with due justifications. Full civil society representation is necessary to
>ensure legitimacy for this new experiment in global governance.
>
>We think that as per Tunis Agenda's multi-stakeholder approach, membership
>should be divided equally among Stakeholders.
>
>We also agree that the organizations having an important role in Internet
>administration and the development of Internet-related technical standards
>should continue to be represented in the MAG.
>However, their representation should not be at the expense of broader civil
>society participation.
>
>Ian Peter
>Ian Peter and Associates Pty Ltd
>PO Box 10670 Adelaide St Brisbane 4000
>Australia
>Tel (+614) 1966 7772 or (+612) 6687 0773
>www.ianpeter.com
>www.internetmark2.org
>www.nethistory.info
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: McTim [mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com]
>Sent: 23 February 2008 07:30
>To: Ian Peter
>Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Adam Peake; Parminder
>Subject: Re: [governance] Reconstituting MAG - the missing section
>
>2008/2/22 Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>:
>> Or maybe this fits better for second sentence and is agreeable? - MtTim if
>> you like it better I'll include it now in a redraft
>
>I like it better than last iteration, but was just about to suggest this:
>
>We think that as per Tunis Agenda's multi-stakeholder approach,
>membership should be divided equally among Stakeholders (or SH
>groups).
>
>Can you live with that?
>
>So now it would read:
>
>The rules for membership of the MAG, including in terms of
>representation of different stakeholders, should be clearly
>established, and made open along with due justifications. Full civil
>society representation is necessary to ensure legitimacy for this new
>experiment in global governance.
>
>We think that as per Tunis Agenda's multi-stakeholder approach,
>membership should be divided equally among Stakeholders. [or SH groups
>if you prefer]
>
>We also agree that the organizations having an important role in
>Internet administration and the development of Internet-related
>technical standards should continue to be represented in the MAG.
>However, their representation should not be at the expense of broader
>civil society participation.
>
>--
>Cheers,
>
>McTim
>$ whois -h whois.afrinic.net mctim
>____________________________________________________________
>
>
>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.9/1293 - Release Date: 22/02/2008
>09:21
>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.9/1293 - Release Date: 22/02/2008
>09:21
>
>
>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.9/1293 - Release Date: 22/02/2008
>09:21
>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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
More information about the Governance
mailing list