[governance] Question 6: Comments on Shiva's proposed paras
Ginger Paque
gpaque at gmail.com
Mon Jul 13 12:28:18 EDT 2009
Shiva... you need to address this concern. It is not only Jeanette who
holds this view.
Thanks, gp
Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
>
>
> Ginger Paque wrote:
>> Thank you Shiva, I can see that you made a serious effort at
>> compromise. However, there are still areas I cannot agree with.
>> Please consider the following counter-proposal, and of course, we
>> hope for comments from others as well:
>>
>> [The following text was re-submitted by Shiva, and then edited by
>> Ginger]
>>
>> The Internet Governance Caucus calls upon the IGF Secretariat to
>> substantially fund IGF programs and participation to further enhance
>> the quality of programs with greater diversity of participation.
>
> The IGF secretariat has no budget to fund the expenses listed below. I
> don't understand why we would want to "call upon the IGF Secretariat to
> > substantially fund IGF programs and participation" in light of the
> lack of such funds.
>
> jeanette
>>
>> There are two aspects to be considered in this regard: a) Present IGF
>> participants representing various stakeholder groups are highly
>> qualified individuals with diverse accomplishments but it is also
>> true that IGF participation needs to be further expanded to include
>> more Civil Society participants known for their commitment and
>> accomplishments outside the IGF arena on various Civil Society
>> causes. Business leaders who are otherwise committed to social and
>> other governance issues are not seen at the IGF, and not all
>> governments are represented at the IGF. And b) The present attendees
>> of the IGF do not represent all participant segments and geographic
>> regions. This needs to be improved and it requires various efforts,
>> but availability of various categories of travel grants for
>> participants may help improve participation by those not attending
>> the IGF for want of funds. IGF already has made some funds available
>> for representation from Less Developed Countries, but such funding
>> achieves a limited objective.
>>
>> The true cost of the IGF (including all visible and invisible costs
>> to the IGF Secretariat, participating Governments, organizations and
>> individual participants) would be several times that of the actual
>> outflow from the IGF Secretariat in organizing the IGF, as reflected
>> in the IGF book of accounts. If an economist estimates the total
>> visible and invisible costs of the IGF, it would be an enormous sum,
>> which is already spent. With an increment in funding for travel
>> support to panel speaker and participants, which would amount to a
>> small proportion of the true cost of the IGF, the quality of panels
>> and the diversity of participation could be improved.
>>
>> With this rationale, the Internet Governance Caucus recommends that
>> the IGF should consider budgetary allocations supported by grants
>> from business, governments, well funded non-governmental and
>> international organizations and the United Nations. The fund may
>> extend travel grants to 200 lead participants (panel speakers,
>> program organizers), full and partial fellowships to a greater number
>> of participants with special attention to participants from
>> unrepresented categories (unrepresented geographic regions and/or
>> unrepresented participant segments and even to those from affluent,
>> represented regions if there is an individual need ).
>>
>> Such a fund would enable the IGF to bring in more diverse opinions to
>> the IGF from experts who would add further value to the IGF. It is
>> especially recommended that such a fund carry no link as to the
>> positions or content proposed by the presenter (as opposed to a grant
>> from a business trust with stated or implied conditions about the
>> positions to be taken). It is recommended that the IGF create a fund
>> large enough to have significant impact in further enhancing quality
>> and diversity of participation.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
>>> Hello Ginger, Michael Guerstein and All,
>>>
>>> Have revised the statement and the changes made are highlighted.
>>> This mail is best viewed with html / mime settings. ( for the
>>> convenience of those whose mail settings are plain text, I am
>>> attaching the text as a PDF file which would show the highlighted
>>> changes )
>>>
>>> Thank you
>>>
>>> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
>>>
>>> The Internet Governance Caucus calls upon the IGF Secretariat to
>>> fund the IGF programs and participation substantially and
>>> significantly to further enhance the quality of programs with
>>> greater diversity of participation. * *There are two aspects to be
>>> considered in this regard: a) WSIS/ present IGF participants
>>> representing various stakeholder groups are highly qualified
>>> individuals with diverse accomplishments but it is also true that
>>> IGF participation needs to be further expanded to invite and
>>> include more Civil Society participants known for their commitment
>>> and accomplishments outside the IGF arena on various Civil Society
>>> causes ; business leaders who are otherwise committed to social
>>> and other governance issues are not seen at the IGF, and not all
>>> governments are represented at the IGF ( and though not for
>>> financial reasons, the present participants from Government are
>>> not represented on a high enough level ) - [ this sentence in
>>> parenthesis may be deleted if unnecessary as it is not directly
>>> relevant to the point ] and b) The present participants of the IGF
>>> do not represent all participant segments and geographic regions.
>>> This needs to be improved and it requires various efforts, but
>>> availability of various categories of Travel Grants for different
>>> classes of participants may help improve participation by those
>>> not attending the IGF for want of funds. IGF already has made some
>>> funds available for representation from Less Developed Countries,
>>> but such funding achieves a limited objective.
>>>
>>> The true cost of the IGF (including all visible and invisible
>>> costs to the IGF Secretariat, participating Governments,
>>> organizations and individual participants) would be several times
>>> that of the actual outflow from the IGF Secretariat in organizing
>>> the IGF, as reflected in the IGF book of accounts. If an economist
>>> estimates the total visible and invisible costs of the IGF, it
>>> would be an enormous sum, which is already spent. For want of a
>>> marginal allocation for travel support to panel speaker and
>>> participants, which would amount to a small proportion of the true
>>> cost of the IGF, the quality of panels and the diversity of
>>> participation are compromised.
>>>
>>> With this rationale, the Internet Governance Caucus recommends
>>> that the IGF should consider liberal budgetary allocations
>>> supported by unconditional grants from business, governments, well
>>> funded non-governmental and international organizations and the
>>> United Nations. The fund may extend uncompromising, comfortable
>>> travel grants/ honorarium to 200 lead participants (panel
>>> speakers, program organizers, who are largely invitees who are
>>> required to be well-received for participation), full and partial
>>> fellowships to a large number of participants with special
>>> attention to participants from unrepresented categories
>>> (unrepresented geographic regions and/or unrepresented participant
>>> segments and even to those from affluent, represented regions if
>>> there is an individual need ).
>>>
>>> Such a fund would enable the IGF to bring in really diverse
>>> opinions to the IGF from experts who would add further value to
>>> the IGF. It is especially recommended that such a fund may be
>>> built up from contributions that are unconditional (as opposed to
>>> a grant from a business trust with stated or implied conditions
>>> about the positions to be taken; 'unconditional' does not imply
>>> that funds may have to be disbursed without even the basic
>>> conditions that the recipient should attend the IGF and attend the
>>> sessions etc. In this context "unconditional" means something
>>> larger. It is to hint at a system of Travel Grants whereby IGF
>>> will pool funds from Business Corporations, Governments,
>>> International Organizations, well funded NGOs and UN with no
>>> implied conditions on the positions to be taken by participants*)*
>>> and may be awarded to panelists and participants unconditionally.
>>> It is recommended that the IGF create a fund large enough to have
>>> significant impact in further enhancing quality and diversity of
>>> participation.
>>>
>>>
>>> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
>>> Blog: http://isocmadras.blogspot.com
>>>
>>> facebook: http://is.gd/x8Sh
>>> LinkedIn: http://is.gd/x8U6
>>> Twitter: http://is.gd/x8Vz
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
>>> <isolatedn at gmail.com <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Ginger
>>>
>>> Will have just a little time to spend on this, will review the
>>> complete questionnaire comments, and reword the Q6 comment, but
>>> don't really have a lot of time today. Leaving for the city in a
>>> few hours for a short trip, will find some time to work tomorrow
>>> as well, but not tonight.
>>>
>>> Would prefer this as an IGC statement, rather than as an
>>> independent proposal, which I could have sent it on my own but
>>> preferred not to.
>>>
>>> Shiva.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Ginger Paque <gpaque at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Shiva,
>>>
>>> I was referring to Q6, as several of us - including myself,
>>> and Ian, as well as Michael and others, are not yet satisfied
>>> with the wording on the funding concept. You are welcome to
>>> continue the discussion and see if you can reach a consensus
>>> on it, but I suspect that by the time everyone is happy, the
>>> statement won't say much of anything. Could you review the
>>> thread on Q6, including Ian's answer to the complete
>>> questionnaire draft, and tell us what you think?
>>>
>>> Let's look at Q 3 separately, ok?
>>>
>>> Thanks. I appreciate your willingness to discuss.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Ginger
>>>
>>> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Ginger
>>>
>>> You would like this submitted as my own comment, rather
>>> than as an IGC statement? Is this only on Q6 or does it
>>> also apply to Q3?
>>>
>>> There were further exchanges between Gurstein and me, and
>>> the misunderstanding are being clarified. Would you really
>>> feel that the entire statement has to be dropped as
>>> comment from IGC?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Ginger Paque
>>> <gpaque at gmail.com <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com>
>>> <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Shiva, As there seems to be quite a bit of controversy
>>> about this
>>> concept and wording, and we are very short on time, I
>>> wonder if we
>>> could continue this discussion after the
>>> questionnaire is
>>> submitted, perhaps for comments to be submitted by the
>>> August
>>> deadline?
>>>
>>> In the meantime, you could submit your own comment,
>>> which would
>>> give you more freedom to make your point. Is that
>>> acceptable to you?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Ginger
>>>
>>> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Michael Gurstein
>>>
>>> A quick reply and a little more later.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 6:12 AM, Michael Gurstein
>>> <gurstein at gmail.com <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>
>>> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>
>>> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> *From:* Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
>>> [mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com> <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>>
>>> <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com> <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>>>]
>>> *Sent:* Sunday, July 12, 2009 6:18 PM
>>> *To:* governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>> <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>>> <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>> <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>
>>> <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>> <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>>> <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>> <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>; Michael Gurstein
>>> *Subject:* Re: [governance] Question 6:
>>> Comments on Siva's
>>> proposed paras
>>>
>>> Hello Michael Gurstein,
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 2:50 AM, Michael
>>> Gurstein
>>> <gurstein at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>
>>> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "The Internet Governance Caucus calls
>>> upon the IGF
>>> Secretariat to fund the IGF programs and
>>> participation
>>> substantially and significantly to
>>> further enhance the
>>> quality of programs with greater
>>> diversity of
>>> participation" sounds better?
>>> YES...
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There are two aspects to be considered
>>> in this
>>> regard: a)
>>> The absence or
>>> non-participation of some of the world's
>>> most renowned
>>> Civil Society opinion
>>> leaders is noticeable; Business Leaders
>>> who are
>>> otherwise
>>> committed to
>>> social and other governance issues off
>>> IGF are not
>>> seen at
>>> the IGF;
>>> Governments are not represented on a
>>> level high enough
>>>
>>> HMMM. WHO/WHAT EXACTLY IS MEANT BY
>>> "RENOWNED CIVIL
>>> SOCIETY
>>> OPINION LEADERS"
>>> (IN SOME CIRCLES THERE ARE AT LEAST
>>> TWO AND
>>> PROBABLY MORE
>>> INTERNAL
>>> CONTRADITIONS IN THAT SIMPLE STATEMENT
>>> AND CERTAINLY
>>> NEITHER WE NOR THE
>>> SECRETARIAT SHOULD BE EXPECTED TO
>>> IDENTIFY WHO THESE
>>> "RENOWNED" FOLKS MIGHT
>>> BE.
>>>
>>> AS WELL, ARE WE LOOKING FOR CIVIL
>>> SOCIETY "LEADERS" OR
>>> FOLKS FROM CIVIL
>>> SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS IN LEADERSHIP
>>> POSITIONS, OR
>>> ARE WE
>>> LOOKING FOR CIVIL
>>> SOCIETY SPOKESPEOPLE WHO UNDERSTAND IG
>>> ISSUES, OR
>>> ARE WE
>>> LOOKING FOR LEADERS
>>> OF RESPONSIBLE REPRESENTATIVE CS
>>> ORGANIZATIONS WHO
>>> HAVE A
>>> POSITION//OPINION/KNOWLEDGE ON IG ISSUES
>>> (EACH OF THESE
>>> CATEGORIES IS
>>> PROBABLY DISCREET AND COULD BE INCLUDED
>>> AMBIGUOUSLY
>>> UNDER
>>> YOUR STATEMENT.
>>>
>>> IF BIZ LEADERS THINK IT IS OF SUFFICIENT
>>> IMPORTANCE
>>> THEY'LL LIKELY COME, IF
>>> NOT, NOT AND NOT MUCH WE OR THE
>>> SECRETARIAT CAN DO
>>> ABOUT
>>> THAT AND SIMILARLY
>>> WITH GOVERNMENTS.
>>>
>>> I THINK THIS PARA SHOULD BE DROPPED...
>>>
>>>
>>> I am sorry, I don't agree with your negative
>>> interpretation of
>>> such a positive suggestion. Are we to assert
>>> that the
>>> present
>>> participants constitute a complete,
>>> representative, and
>>> ultimate group ? NO, BUT
>>> I'M HAVING
>>> TROUBLE SEEING WHAT NAOMI KLEIN OR VENDANA
>>> SHIVA WOULD HAVE TO CONTRIBUTE EITHER...
>>>
>>> I will have to browse a little to learn about Naomi
>>> Klein;
>>> Vendana Shiva is an Indian name that sounds
>>> familiar, but I
>>> wasn't thinking of these names, nor was my point
>>> intended to
>>> bring in anyone whom I know or associated with.
>>> Looks like
>>> you are reading between the lines of what I write.
>>>
>>> HAVING THE HEAD OF SEWA OR K-NET
>>> WOULD SEEM TO
>>> ME TO BE RATHER
>>> MORE USEFUL, "RENOWNED" OR NOT, AS THEY AT
>>> LEAST COULD TALK
>>> WITH SOME DIRECT KNOWLEDGE ABOUT HOW IG
>>> ISSUES IMPACT
>>> THEM AND
>>> THE KINDS OF THINGS THEY ARE TRYING TO DO ON
>>> THE GROUND.
>>>
>>> Again an Indian reference - you have used the word
>>> "Sewa" in
>>> your comment. Perhaps you are reading me as someone
>>> pushing
>>> the Indian point of view? I am not. I am born in
>>> India, a
>>> participant from India, I have faith in and respect
>>> for my
>>> country but I believe that in an International
>>> context I am at
>>> least a little wider than a national. I have been
>>> inspired by
>>> teachers who taught me in my school days that
>>> "patriotism is a
>>> prejudice" which is profound thinking which in
>>> depths implies
>>> that one must be beyond being patriotic and be
>>> rather global.
>>>
>>> (Will come back this point and write more in
>>> response to what
>>> you have written a little later)
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy.
>>>
>>> MBG
>>> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
>>> M
>>>
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> You received this message as a
>>> subscriber on the list:
>>> governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>> <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>>> <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>> <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>
>>> <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>> <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>>> <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>> <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>
>>> To be removed from the list, send any
>>> message to:
>>>
>>> governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>>> <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>
>>> <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>>> <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>>
>>>
>>> <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>>> <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>
>>> <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>>> <mailto: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
>
____________________________________________________________
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