AW: [governance] E-G8 second day reporting

devonrb at gmail.com devonrb at gmail.com
Fri May 27 01:35:50 EDT 2011 

A representative status has its place, a legal representative status with a defined role and an administrative structure would increase the efficiency and provide the base for official recognition of IGF as seems to be the need.
Sent from my BlackBerry® device from Digicel

-----Original Message-----
From: parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
Sender: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 23:47:46 
To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
Reply-To: governance at lists.cpsr.org,parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
Subject: Re: AW: [governance] E-G8 second day reporting



On Thursday 26 May 2011 09:52 PM, Miguel Alcaine wrote:
> Dear Divina,
>
> I fully support exploring your idea:
>
> /"...Maybe we should declare ourselves as a federation of associations 
> and groups
> welcoming all sorts of members, so that we send the message across that
> there is a critical mass of people seriously thinking about these issues,
> with a certain memory of past events and advances..."/

That was what the IGC was born as, and was always supposed to be. 
However, instead of growing into this role, it may have steadily slid 
away from this central identity and role. .. The gap that this has left 
is very significant and important to fill. There is an urgent need for 
more purposive civil society action in the IG arena than what we are 
able to do.

It is one special feature of the IGC that it supports an open public 
list for IG discussions and that it conducts most of its work in this 
public space as well. And this feature is very very important, and cant 
and shouldnt ever go away. But this feature does not exhaust the role of 
the caucus. In fact, the proposition being forwarded here is that, 
however important, this is not 'the' primary and defining aspect of IGC. 
It was never meant to be that way. The primary and defining core of the 
IGC is to be a global civil society advocacy group  - as Divina puts it, 
as a federation of groups and association and other members. We should 
explore how we can grow towards and in such a role.


Parminder

>
> It is important to convey the message about the messenger of this 
> diverse group conformed by people and organizations genuinely 
> interested in, thinking on and working on IG issues.
>
> Best,
>
> Miguel
>
> Disclaimer
> My ideas are those of my own and does not represent any position of my 
> employer or any other institution
>
> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 6:38 AM, Divina MEIGS <divina.meigs at orange.fr 
> <mailto:divina.meigs at orange.fr>> wrote:
>
>     That's what I mean indeed. It seems we never had a "convening
>     power" with
>     business, and I don't think the  international chamber of commerce
>     is enough
>     representation for that community, in spite of its loyal presence
>     to IGF...
>
>     We have to think of other ways of engaging with big business, and
>     it might
>     be via small businesses (arguably part of civil society in UN
>     listings). We
>     should identify their representatives in WIPO and other arenas and
>     make an
>     effort to drag them out, person per person...
>
>     We do have to ask ourselves what we want to do as CS caucus. I was
>     hard put
>     the last two days claiming any legitimacy for our constituency,
>     which is
>     normal but debilitating. Maybe we should turn ourselves into an
>     association
>     or ngo of some kind to be able to attend such fora and to make
>     declarations
>     on the same standing as isoc or quadrature du net... We have to be
>     more
>     incisive and more aggressive even inside the CSTD and ECOSOC world
>     because
>     of course we shouldn't allow just the G8 dictate the agenda, even
>     if comes
>     from countries that purport to be democratic ...
>
>     Maybe we should declare ourselves as a federation of associations
>     and groups
>     welcoming all sorts of members, so that we send the message across
>     that
>     there is a critical mass of people seriously thinking about these
>     issues,
>     with a certain memory of past events and advances (so as not to
>     start from
>     scratch like yesterday where i had the feeling i had to explain
>     "governance"
>     and "multistakeholderism" to these top CEOs). Critical mass is
>     what gets
>     attention of governements and businesses alike, because it is
>     attached to
>     amount of votes and of sales... We have to start appearing as the
>     global
>     public opinion on these issues, even if we know we are still rather
>     sphericules of opinion, but one has to start. Our colleagues in
>     the Arab
>     spring countries could teach us quite a few lessons, in that way.
>
>     Best
>     Divina
>     ps: don't get me wrong: i don't think we did badly this time around in
>     Paris, and the media coverage is rather favorable to us, but it
>     clearly was
>     too much improvised ...
>
>
>     Le 26/05/11 13:47, « Roland Perry »
>     <roland at internetpolicyagency.com
>     <mailto:roland at internetpolicyagency.com>> a
>     écrit :
>
>     > In message <CA03EF21.2134A%divina.meigs at orange.fr
>     <mailto:CA03EF21.2134A%25divina.meigs at orange.fr>>, at 11:50:57 on Thu,
>     > 26 May 2011, Divina MEIGS <divina.meigs at orange.fr
>     <mailto:divina.meigs at orange.fr>> writes
>     >> It could be an interesting outcome to have a major endorsement
>     by the G8
>     >> states of a concerted strategy around the critical ressources
>     of the
>     >> internet
>     >
>     > The post-Okinawa G8 Dotforce meeting I went to (in UK) was all about
>     > Development Issues (access, primarily).
>     >
>     >> it would have to be truly multistakeholder or it would totally
>     >> unacceptable ...
>     >
>     > What G8 has is "convening power", they can easily get a whole
>     bunch of
>     > multinational CEOs to the table. The same is true of the World
>     Economic
>     > Forum.
>     >
>     > For whatever reason, the IGF is still has some way to go in this
>     regard
>     > - although it got off to a reasonable start in Athens, the last
>     couple
>     > of years I've seen a trend for the main sessions to rely on
>     speakers who
>     > were "there anyway" (for workshops perhaps), rather than because
>     they
>     > wanted to make a special trip to appear.
>
>
>     ____________________________________________________________
>     You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org <mailto: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
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20110527/8e525881/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, 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

More information about the Governance mailing list