[governance] No concluding ending for CSTD WG to IGF improvement

[Anriette Esterhuysen]

One thing we must do is give the Kenyan organisers as much support as we
can to make this a really good IGF. It is important to note that no one
in the CSTD meeting did not question the value of the IGF as space for
dialogue and capacity building.  They affirmed it.

And for those of us who care about development issues... lots of good
workshop proposals, with developing country partners, and particularly
people working in policy and regulation in developing countries,
including governments, focusing on relevant policy issues and questions,
e.g. digital migration, net neutrality, public access, access to
information.

Anriette



On 28/03/11 18:08, Lee W McKnight wrote:
> 
> I am shocked! there is politics at UN. 
> 
> Ok, not so much.
> 
> 2 part strategy imho: 
> 
> 1) propose good workshops + plenary thingies asap /make IGF V a substantive success
> 
> 2) make noise as Jeanette suggests while, like good UN player, working system. Our good friends at CSTD, all governments, and other stakeholders are of course pursuing the planet's best interests. Except when... we make noise that they're not.
> 
> Lee
> 
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Jeanette Hofmann [jeanette at wzb.eu]
> Sent: Monday, March 28, 2011 11:18 AM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; William Drake
> Cc: Anriette Esterhuysen
> Subject: Re: [governance] No concluding ending for CSTD WG to IGF improvement
> 
> I think the only powerful means we have is campaigning, campaigning in a
> big way. The way we did in the early stages of WSIS.
> 
> 
> jeanette
> 
> Am 28.03.2011 14:14, schrieb William Drake:
>> Hi
>>
>> Thanks for the assessment Anriette.
>>
>> On Mar 27, 2011, at 8:53 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:
>>
>>> In other words, other than for the non-governmental stakeholders
>>> this process was not really about IGF improvements, but about the
>>> IGF being a stage for other plays.
>>
>> Alas, this seems to say it all.  Is there any reason to think this
>> will change?  If not, what alternatives should we begin to think
>> about?
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Bill____________________________________________________________ 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
> 

-- 
------------------------------------------------------
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