[governance] on Observers at MAG meeting

[Adam Peake]

>Clarification below McTim:

Agree with Anriette.

Business/tech community are very effective, strong well coordinated 
participation.  They often present a near uniform voice on issues, 
support each other, build on each others arguments/proposals, and 
they are often successful in getting their views reflected in the 
outcomes. Not a complaint, their professionalism is something to try 
to learn from and emulate.

But I think their successes are somewhat short term. Issue of 
outcomes is one example. There has been clear support from many 
stakeholders, very noticeably developing country governments (and us) 
for some form of more concrete outcome.  This was one of the 
recommendations of the consultations Mr Sha led in Sharm, he saw it 
as a consensus of the process he led, and it's something we hear 
asked for again and again. And tech/business seems to resist at every 
opportunity.  There is no compromise, just a very effectively 
delivered voice against.  Brazil made some very sensible suggestions 
during the open consultation a couple of days ago, but I am not sure 
they got through the "lobby".

Same is pretty much true of enhanced cooperation, consideration of 
new arrangements for critical Internet resources.

These issues will get on agenda eventually (example is critical 
Internet resources, which was kept of the agenda of the first year, 
but eventually got on), but in the mean time governments give up, the 
process gives them nothing, not working for them, so they look to 
alternatives that better suit their modes of working.  Like the CSTD, 
or the proposals in IBSA statement. Who can blame them.

I think business/tech community needs to be careful as to what it's 
winning here.  In the end they may just kill the process. Governments 
will go elsewhere, and we'll all be screwed.

Adam




>On 24/02/11 20:33, McTim wrote:
>>  Hi,
>>
>>  On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 7:00 PM, 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.
>>>
>>>  I am not quite sure that is what happened today.
>>>
>>>  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
>>>
>>>  * 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.
>>>
>>>  * Civil society members of the MAG are doing their best, but battling.
>>>
>>>  * 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.
>>>
>>>  * Government participation is very limited... with good efforts from
>>>  Brazil, India and a handful of northern governments.
>>>
>>>  * There are some MAG members who don't participate at all. Why are they
>>>  there?
>>>
>>>  * It is not a very developing country or civil society friendly space.
>>>
>>>  * I think the private sector and the technical community should reflect
>>>  on their strategies
>>
>>
>>  What is their strategy(ies)?
>
>Would be good if people from tech community and business can respond
>themselves.
>>
>>
>>  ... 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.
>>
>>
>>  How are they withdrawing if they "extremely well
>>   prepared and organised, and, in attendance. Therefore they are the
>>  most influential group by far in the MAG."
>  >
>Two different 'theys'.
>
>It is governments that are withdrawing, or have withdrawn. Some have
>never really participated. I was not referring to the business and tech
>community.
>
>Personally I am really critical of governments who don't participate.
>Kenya was the only African government that, as the host, made an effort
>to comment on the IGF programme.
>
>I believe they should work inside the IGF space.
>
>But their lack of participation also weakens the IGF and the IGF's
>legitimacy and impact.
>
>My point was, that, sitting in a MAG meeting, I really empathise with
>developing country governments... it is not easy to make an impact, or
>get your points across. If English is not your first language, and you
>don't have very well though out positions it is even harder.
>
>Perhaps MAG meetings work better when there are not so many observers?
>What do MAG members think?
>
>Anriette
>
>
>>  ??
>>
>
>--
>------------------------------------------------------
>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