[governance] Civil Society (was Re: caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting)

Wed Feb 13 13:05:16 EST 2013

Avri to BCC (since she'll get it from the list anyway)

Inline responses.

On 13 Feb 2013, at 16:25, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:

> in order to perhaps explain better where I'm coming from... what we're
> doing in developing an IGC "written contribution", especially during
> the consensus process phase, is part of what the IGC mission statement
> calls "representation of civil society contributions in Internet
> governance processes"... I would suggest that if you want to be part of
> a group representing civil society in any topic area, you need to be
> deeply immersed in civil society thinking in that topic area. Of course
> it is possible to achieve this kind of immersion while having a
> different (typically, non civil society) day job during which one works
> in a different topic area. I don't believe that it is possible to be in
> such a way immersed in civil society thinking in a topic area while at
> the same time representing business interests in the same topic area.

I am very aware of the process you are engaged in, I've been engaged in IG policy for many years now in various guises and I've followed this list and the CS work on IG for all of them. 

This is pretty simple: I am not my day job, and you are not yours. Your argument suggests to me that you take it as given that people are incapable of differentiating their views from that of their employer, or of turning off their advocacy of their employer's views from their own at any time. I don't believe this is true - in fact, I am absolutely certain it is not, I know many people who can do this.

<snip>

> In any case, your recent response to Parminder was to my ears very much
> an expression of an industry perspective.

I hope you don't take this the wrong way, but if you think that is true, you must not have much experience with industry representatives; from most sectors, the last thing you'd hear was what I said. That said you are welcome to your opinion :)

> That is not a contradiction with your claim that you're "an advocate
> for actual people". In fact, isn't it in a way the whole point of
> industry is that it exists to meet needs of actual people? Any company
> which doesn't do that is likely to go bankrupt quickly!

As I said to you, my job is not the totality of me, and my participation here is, to repeat, entirely in my personal capacity; if I were to put something that was CCIA's view forward it would be clearly labelled as such. I also disagree with your statement that 'industry exists to meet needs of actual people.' That is most definitely not why mainstream industry exists to do. It exists to make money. I think we can all think of instances where industry has proceeded to make money in ways that are demonstrably the opposite of meeting the needs of people. Just look at the financial crisis.

Separately, the charter of the IGC also doesn't conform to your view in my understanding of it. Below the relevant section:

"Membership
The members of the IGC are individuals, acting in personal capacity, who subscribe to the charter of the caucus. All members are equal and have the same rights and duties. "

I am an individual, I am acting in my personal capacity, and I subscribe to the charter. Given my day job, I am entirely happy to forgo the right to vote in any undertaking where a vote is required. However, I have as much right as anyone else who meets the membership criteria to offer an opinion, or make a proposal, congruent with the Charter's aims and principles.

<snip>

> We civil society people however need to be careful to maintain our
> independence, and identity as civil society, and that we don't allow the
> positions that are appropriate for civil society to take to be watered
> down etc.

I'm pretty confident that this group of people is capable of maintaining its independence. I've followed it for many years now. There is zero possibility that someone can come along and co-opt this group into becoming someone else's mouthpiece. I don't think you give it enough credit with your statement.

<snip>

-- 
Regards,

Nick Ashton-Hart
Geneva Representative
Computer & Communcations Industry Association (CCIA)
Tel: +41 (22) 534 99 45
Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44
Mobile: +41 79 595 5468
USA Tel: +1 (202) 640-5430
email/IM (Jabber/GTalk): nashton at ccianet.org
Skype: nashtonhart
http://www.ccianet.org

Instead of sending cards to commemorate the festive season this year, CCIA Geneva has made a donation to Medecins sans Frontieres in the name of our member companies and our colleagues and friends in the Permanent Missions and UN system in Geneva

Need to schedule a meeting or call with me? Feel free to pick a time and date convenient for you at http://meetme.so/nashton

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130213/f9ddf9d4/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/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