[governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of 18-19 Summit?

Mon Oct 10 10:00:13 EDT 2011

Interesting suggestions for a statement are being discussed. I hope to be
able to comment on Sala´s e-mail soon.

I just would like to reinforce that, as Jeremy mentioned, IGC has produced a
statememt about enhanced cooperation. I could find it online here:
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan043237.pdf
and I take the opportunity to ask Jeremy to "pull" all our previous
statements to the current website, as they are one of the most important
elements of our institutional memory.

On that statement IGC pointed out four general options about EC. The
discussion to reach this 4 options was a very rich one, and I believe that
any position from IGC about the institutional aspect of EC should build on
that 4 options, not start from scratch.

I also take the opportunity to ask for more clarification about the
suggestion for the poll, as I did not understand what would be the topics
covered.

Best wishes,

Marília

On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Marilia Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> Sorry for joining the discussion late, but I tried to find out what will be
> forwarded to IBSA summit and in what status. As far as I could understand,
> from the Brazilian gov: a) the seminar will be acknowledged in the summit b)
> there will be a proposal that CS from IBSA participates fully on the
> formulation of any proposal of institutional change/mechanism and c) it will
> be proposed that wider discussions with CS from the three countries is
> carried out to improve IBSA proposal before any further step is taken.
>
> In any case, I think that it does not diminishes the importance of inputs
> from IGC, especially if these inputs are aimed at concreteley improving
> IBSA´s set of recommendations. In my personal view, there is no other
> country/group of countries that is being more open to dialogue about their
> position on institutional changes than IBSA, so concrete proposals that the
> three countries could take on board would be more useful than making a
> statement to solely be against X, Y or Z.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Marília
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
>
>> **
>> On 08/10/11 10:14, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>>  I edited my earlier comments, here is the revised version:
>>
>>
>> I like this, though probably we can lose the UN-style wording of the
>> preamble (I wrote my first IGC statement in the same way, but others pointed
>> out that as CS we don't need to imitate the intergovernmental style).
>>
>>
>> *Acknowledging* that the WGIG in its 2005 report concluded that there is
>> merit in improving institutional coordination as well as coordination among
>> all stakeholders at the regional, subregional and national levels, the IGC
>> believes that this does not justify the creation of an institution[s1] ;
>>
>>
>> This may be too strong?  Last year, we wrote in a consensus statement that
>> "It is imperative that this [governance] deficit continue to be addressed
>> through the existing institutions, and where appropriate through new
>> institutional developments that comply with the accepted process criteria of
>> being open, accountable, transparent, democratic and inclusive."
>>
>>
>>  [Suggestion to IGC: We can hold a white monkey survey and take a vote on
>> the issue – although we should be prepared for the results]
>>
>>
>> I agree that this could be helpful, so I propose to add an optional
>> section about these issues to the upcoming coordinator election poll, after
>> the vote for coordinator, so as not to bother people with multiple polls in
>> a short space of time.  This will make it easier to draft a short statement
>> that, as Carlos said, is proactive in suggesting improvements rather than
>> just harping on the negatives of the IBSA proposal.  Even if we miss the
>> Summit dates, it will be useful to have this up our sleeves for later.
>>
>> --
>>
>> *Dr Jeremy Malcolm
>> Project Coordinator*
>> Consumers International
>> Kuala Lumpur Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East
>> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur,
>> Malaysia
>> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
>>
>> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
>> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
>> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
>> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
>> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
>>
>> *www.consumersinternational.org*
>> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>>
>> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
>> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
> FGV Direito Rio
>
> Center for Technology and Society
> Getulio Vargas Foundation
> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
>

-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/ee9918f1/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