[governance] TENTATIVE FINAL draft response to MAG questionnaire

[parminder]

On Monday 11 October 2010 11:45 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> ******
> _It is important that regional meetings play a more important role in 
> IGF agenda-setting and issue-framing. The discussions that take place 
> during the meetings, if summarized in an objectively and timely 
> manner, could represent real regional contributions to the process._***
> ***
> ***
> _ The outcomes of regional meetings should also serve to better 
> clarify and sharpen discussions, reducing the complexity of themes 
> into concrete issues to be addressed at the IGF._
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
>
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ******

Before we seek a more formal role for regional meetings (which ones??) 
in IGF agenda setting and issue framing we need to convince ourselves 
about what we are talking about here. Can any group get up and say, hey, 
we are the regional IGF meeting holder, and the outcomes of that meeting 
are then seen , as we propose here, to have a higher validity in IGF 
agenda setting and issue framing. As i have said it earlier, with all 
due respect to those you did all the hard work, this is kind of what 
happened in the case of Asia regional IGF (which I did attend under 
protest, clearly informing the organisers that I will attend only if I 
am allowed to make the point regarding how i consider the whole process 
of organsing the Asia IGF problematic, which I then did speak about at 
the meeting).

As much as I know about the Latin American process, I very much welcome 
regional IGFs getting more prominence if they are held on that LA model. 
And if so held, they indeed both greatly increase participation, and 
give much better time and space for a more reasoned consideration of 
issues key to the particular region.

Before, or at least at the same time as, we recommend a more formal role 
for outcomes of regional IGFs in the global IGF, we need to mention the 
minimum basic conditions for what can be considered a regional IGF 
meeting for this purpose. For instance, the nature of its organizing 
committee,  complete transparency of funding mechanisms, availability of 
support for CS groups to attend, the process of managing and allocating 
this funding support, clarity on mechanism by which the agenda issues 
and/ or 'messages' from these meetings are brought to the IGF 
etc............  These things need to be written in our response before 
we recommend that these meetings me given higher legitimacy in IGF 
agenda framing.

parminder


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20101011/012509fc/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