[governance] on Observers at MAG meeting

Thu Feb 24 17:49:27 EST 2011

My responses...these are personal thoughts and i cannot speak about the perceptions of other mag members as i am responding only in my personal capacity as a mag member..

On 24 Feb 2011, at 21:00, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> wrote:

> I would hope that the MAG tries to distill the inputs from the written
> submissions, and the open consultation.

There was an artificial amount of speed being put in by chair and secretariat to cover the agenda but i believe we tried to get some of the points in and more will be done through the working groups created.....the IG4D wg will be revived in the next one or two days and i will inform the email link again....
> 
> I am not quite sure that is what happened today.

The mag did carry a certain level of confusion to the meeting regarding their status and the chairing of the meeting...furthermore, the secretary was extra careful and diplomatic that further added to the confusion....still the CS members are not coordinated....i have always wanted igc to help its nominated MAG members to prepare on certain important aspects as you have pointed out....i guess the ability to observe has revived this need that is a positive sign.

> 
> My other observations, as an observer, are:
> 
> * The MAG should make use of small group discussions who make proposals
> on content and themes, with these groups then coming back into plenary
> 

I have always felt this need and if the archive of the Igc list is revisited from the past, we will find messages by me near to the dates of he oc and mag meetings requesting input from Igc....so far at least i was referring to the the igc statements made to the previous ocs.

> * The technical community and the private sector is extremely well
> prepared and organised, and, in attendance. Therefore they are the most
> influential group by far in the MAG.

This remains a fact and is indeed a call to look at the fact that mag members like myself benefit greatly from Igc inputs and contributions and at least the ground for ig4d is struggled for despite strong resistance from other groups..

> 
> * Civil society members of the MAG are doing their best, but battling.

This was very true and i am sure you also observed why....but i did attempt the breaks requests for having discussions with stakeholders and observers

> 
> * Civil society is prepared in that people have proposals, text and
> ideas, but is not well organised on site and not prepared for effective
> participation in the meeting.
> 

We really did not have any proposals except the Igc statement and with the approach to a traditional format, though i did not like it, there wasn't much preparation to counter that.....

> * Government participation is very limited... with good efforts from
> Brazil, India and a handful of northern governments.

Yes as you shares the govts have been supportive but we could achieve much more cooperation certain areas of mutual concern...such as democratization, freedom of expression, human rights, development etc...

> 
> * There are some MAG members who don't participate at all. Why are they
> there?
> 

I can only speak for myself and we raised this concerns during november mag meeting but the issue has to be revisited and maybe request rotation of membership to allow new faces and voices to step in...

> * It is not a very developing country or civil society friendly space.

Very true but we should still not shy away, stand and protect our ground and be more coordinated....

> 
> * I think the private sector and the technical community should reflect
> on their strategies... they work in the short term, but will they work
> in the long term?  They feed into the criticism of the IGF from certain
> governments which, whatever our view of it may be, is not conducive to
> making this process achieve its goals. Their withdrawal from the process
> makes it less and less valuable for those of us who need to and want to
> work with/challenge our governments to deal with basic internet access,
> regulation, openness etc. issues.

Lets see in the near future how we can find strategies to at least touch the issue...

> 
> * I think civil society in the MAG should plan, plan plan and prepare,
> prepare, prepare. Beforehand, but also on site.  Not easy though.. I do
> realise that...
> 

I totally agree to this and will draw attention to this point well before the may mag meetings....

> Anriette
> (in my individual capacity as an observer for about 3/4 of the meeting)

thank you for being there!

to all.....
I won't be able to further debate on my sharing above and i hope that will be respected for the moment...Take care all.

> 
> 
> On 24/02/11 16:03, Izumi AIZU wrote:
>> I don't think we have "official" MAG members from IGC.
>> There are, however, members of MAG who were nominated
>> by IGC and appointed by UN SG as MAG members.
>> So we feel they are sort of our members.
>> 
>> I think MAG members are supposed to work on their own capacity, not
>> "representing" any organization/afficilation per se.
>> 
>> The announcement says:
>> 
>> "All Advisory Group members serve in their personal capacity, but are
>> expected to have extensive linkages with their respective stakeholder
>> groups"
>> 
>> http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2010/pi1936.doc.htm
>> 
>> izumi
>> 
>> 
>> 2011/2/24 Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com>:
>>> Do we IGC have official representation in IGF MAG?
>>> Is there any member of MAG who's membership was assigned on the basis of
>>> IGC?
>>> Imran
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org>
>>> To: Governance List <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>>> Sent: Thu, 24 February, 2011 18:42:30
>>> Subject: [governance] on Observers at MAG meeting
>>> 
>>> The Chair just said:
>>> 
>>> The MAG members concluded on the observer status,
>>> "If we do have time, we will call upon a discussion of the soft"
>>> 
>>> Agreement - speaking is restricted to MAG members only.
>>> 
>>> izumi
>>> 
>>> --
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>    governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>>    http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>> 
>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>>    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>>    http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>> 
>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
> executive director
> association for progressive communications
> www.apc.org
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> 
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

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