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

Sun Jan 31 01:11:49 EST 2010

Hello

This statement does not quite say what needs to be said, does not emphasize
what needs to be emphasized while saying in places what ought not to be said
or what might better be avoided.

With all due respect for the IGC, its Coordinators and all its participants,
I abstain.

Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
http://www.isocmadras.com
facebook: http://is.gd/x8Sh
LinkedIn: http://is.gd/x8U6
Twitter: http://is.gd/x8Vz

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> 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.
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100131/af8e741f/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