[governance] < 24 hours remaining to vote YES + thematic working

[Hartmut Glaser]

YES + thematic working groups

=========================================

On 30/01/2010 07:32, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> If you have not voted on the IGC statement for the next open 
> consultation meeting, please vote now.  At present the statement might 
> not pass the consensus call - not because there has been a lot of 
> opposition to it, but because the total number of responses is still 
> relatively low.
>
> Please also remember that we have another thread in which to discuss 
> the agenda for the Vilnius meeting: so far there has been no response 
> to Parminder's suggestion of a theme on "Network Neutrality/Open 
> Internet".
>
> Here once again is the statement on which we have a consensus call. 
>  Everyone who has voted YES so far has been contacted off-list to 
> clarify their attitude towards thematic working groups - none have yet 
> changed their vote.
>
> Please vote:
>
> *YES + thematic working groups *to accept the statement as shown here
> *YES* to accept the statement without the [underlined passage]
> *NO* to reject the statement
>
> *Submission of the IGC in taking stock of the Sharm el Sheikh meeting 
> of the IGF*
>
> The Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) strongly supports the 
> continuation of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) as a 
> multi-stakeholder forum for the discussion of Internet-related public 
> policy issues.  When, as we expect, the forum's mandate is extended 
> for a further term, there are a number of adjustments that we believe 
> should be taken into account, continuing the IGF's pattern of 
> incremental improvement since its inauguration in 2006.
>
> None of these suggestions would fundamentally alter the IGF as an 
> institution; for example, we are content that it remain formally 
> convened by the UN Secretary General, with an independent budget and a 
> Secretariat under contract with the United Nations Department of 
> Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA).  We do not see any benefit to 
> the IGF in moving underneath a different UN body such as the ITU.
>
> One question on which the IGC is in clear agreement is that the 
> composition of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) itself should 
> be more evenly divided between the stakeholder groups.  Many also 
> believe that the stakeholders should have a more direct role in the 
> selection of MAG members, and that MAG discussions should continue to 
> be made more transparent.
>
> One particular aspect of the IGF's operations in which the 
> participation of stakeholders could be improved is in setting the 
> substantive agenda of IGF meetings.  We understand that the MAG might 
> not be rotated this year (though in our view the uncertainty about the 
> IGF's future need not preclude that).  If a rotation does not take 
> place, care must be taken that this does not result in the 
> programme for the Vilnius meeting being prematurely set in stone. 
> [[The IGC is ready to make innovative contributions to enhance the 
> present "Secretariat-MAG-Open Consultation" mechanism for the 
> preparation of IGF meetings.]]
>
> The IGF should also consider how to improve its orientation towards 
> the development of tangible outputs, even if these would amount to 
> "messages" rather than to recommendations, declarations or statements 
> (though many of our members would also support outputs of these 
> stronger kinds).  Whatever form its outputs take, efforts should be 
> taken to ensure that they are transmitted to relevant external 
> institutions through appropriate mechanisms.
>
> Similarly, attention must be given to the effectiveness of the IGF's 
> intersessional work program, which is currently limited to open 
> consultations, MAG meetings, dynamic coalition meetings, and loosely 
> connected national and regional meetings.  In particular, there should 
> be a better mechanism than at present for these other groups and 
> meetings to present their outputs to the IGF as a whole.  This would 
> require the IGF to set more stringent standards for such groups and 
> meetings, including open membership, democratic processes, and perhaps 
> multi-stakeholder composition.
>
> [The MAG should also organize thematic working groups to develop 
> background material, IGF discussion synthesis etc on major themes 
> selected to be taken up by the IGF.]
>
> We thank you for the opportunity to present you with these thoughts, 
> which reflect a "rough consensus" of our several hundred members from 
> civil society.  We look forward to continuing to constructively engage 
> with and participate in the IGF over the course of its renewed term.
>
> *About the IGC*
>
> The IGC is an association of individuals in civil society, with a wide 
> spread of geographic and gender representation, who are actively 
> engaged in internet governance and the IGF. Formed during the lead up 
> to the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), our mission is 
> to promote global public interest objectives in Internet governance 
> policy making. It now comprises more than 400 individual subscribers 
> to its mailing list, who have subscribed to its Charter.  More about 
> our coalition can be found at http://www.igcaucus.org.
>
> -- 
>
> *Jeremy Malcolm
> Project Coordinator*
> Consumers International
> Kuala Lumpur Office for Asia Pacific and the Middle East
> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, 
> Malaysia
> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
>
> *CI is 50*
> Consumers International marks 50 years of the global consumer movement 
> in 2010.
> Celebrate with us as we continue to support, promote and protect 
> consumer rights around the world.
> _http://www.consumersinternational.org/50_
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice 
> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=100521&int1stParentNodeID=89765>. 
> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100130/0e8b8415/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t