[governance] Fw: [cs-coord] On whether CSCG should be engaged on WEF's initiative (was Re: Timetable re WEF)
Ian Peter
ian.peter at ianpeter.com
Thu Sep 4 08:01:01 EDT 2014
Cross posted here as well – FYI
I'm cross posting this here because it was suggested I do this, after I
originally posted this to the CSCG list. To give context - some of our
members are concerned that there hasnt been enough discussion and want to
delay consideration until we have clarity about WEF's objectives and plans,
intentions etc, and formally announce their intentions including decoupling
from NetMundial. I suggested those in Istanbul seek another meeting if
possible to clarify matters; but after some thought I posted this. I think
this explains where we are at from my perspective.
Thinking more about this -
while I would still urge you to meet with WEF and seek more clarity, I think
our dilemma is this.
WEF dont want to be clear about the process because they want it to be seen
that the incoming committee defines the process. So we are in a Catch-22
here – it they define it, they are not being bottom-up, if they don’t, we
don’t think we have enough clarity to participate.
WEF want to move quickly so they have something to show for their efforts.
they expect to have all other committee members in place next week, the only
exception being civil society. They have agreed to us having more time, and
also to us choosing all CS members. Now if we ask for more time, they will
see the strength of the project and their commitments at risk and our
involvement as unreliable.
This is particularly so because we really dont know how much time it would
take us to decide whether we want to commit or not. I doubt there will be
any more clarity in one week, or three weeks, or 3 months. So I actually
think we might have a lot to lose by delaying, and nothing to gain. The
nature of this initiative as something new and outside our normal range of
experience means that we probably have to take a risk, or alternatively
determine right now to disengage.
I think we should take that risk, and stick to our timetable or something
workable very close to it. In doing so, to minimise our risk, we can
continue to engage and select candidates, but communicate with this process
some misgivings and concerns. We can indicate an intention to withdraw
unless certain developments are committed to.
So by all means talk to them about more time, but I am not sure whether it
will help. I know that things are difficult at IGF with so many meetings and
poor wifi, and if it helps we could delay a couple of days and shorten the
nomination period. But to be honest I dont think we are going to have any
more clarity then, or within a month. So we may have to engage and be part
of the development, rather than waiting to react to something which really
shouldn’t be developed much further without our involvement anyway.
Typical difficulties at the beginning. I understand the caution. Let’s use
the caution to define our concerns and communicate them as we engage. That’s
my thoughts, but the decision is yours.
Ian
From: Mawaki Chango
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 9:32 PM
To: Internet Governance
Cc: Norbert Bollow
Subject: Re: [governance] Fw: [cs-coord] On whether CSCG should be engaged on WEF's initiative (was Re: Timetable re WEF)
Dear All,
In light of the position taken by the JNC below, please be advised that if the CSCG go forward with the decision to participate in this WEF process --which still is being considered but not adopted by the group yet-- the formal announcement of nominees, if and when that occurs, will have to include the acknowledgement that "although JNC is a member of CSCG, JNC has opted out from participation in this particular selection process" (or something along those lines.)
We were set to proceed roughly by COB today, UTC time, if everything goes as planned. So if you have any strong views about this, I'd invite you to post them now, maybe until tonight. Thank you.
Mawaki
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:
For transparency on a key position taken by JNC in CSCG, and with the
idea to possibly also inspire discussion on this question in IGC and
BestBits which doesn't seem to started here yet...
Greetings,
Norbert
co-convenor, Just Net Coalition
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2014 12:54:39 +0200
From: Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch>
Subject: [cs-coord] On whether CSCG should be engaged on WEF's
initiative (was Re: Timetable re WEF)
On Tue, 2 Sep 2014 08:13:54 +1000
"Ian Peter" <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
> Tuesday September 2 ASAP after 8am - report to member groups and open
> discussion focussed on whether we should participate and if so under
> what conditions.
After some very intense discussions, the current JNC view is that CSCG
as such should not be doing selections for WEF's initiative (whatever it
ends up being called.) The reasoning is as follows:
* It is fine for WEF or any other business group or anyone really to
create an initiative in any way they like, with themselves in the
steering seat, as long as they don't explicitly or implicitly claim
it to be a multistakeholder initiative.
* Changing the name of WEF's “Netmundial Initiative” to something else,
for example the idea of “Net World” that WEF mentioned, it a good and
positive step but that's not likely to result in a very deep and
profound change in how the initiative is perceived and framed now that
it has made a big splash under the “Netmundial Initiative” name,
unless it is also clearly rebranded as an initiative of a business
community as opposed to a multistakeholder initiative. An initiative
of a business community can of course still invite some civil society
people to participate in a sense of advising them, that is perfectly
fine. They can invite some whom they already know, and/or if they then
still have gaps, I would in my personal capacity be happy to make
suggestions about who else they might consider to invite.
* However CSCG should not be involved in making selections of civil
society representatives for a “steering committee” which really has
only an advisory capacity while the real decision making authority
remains in the hands of WEF and its business members. This is in
contrast the (real) NetMundial process where it was the
multistakeholder committees which had the decision-making authority
to steer the process. We should not involve CSCG in a way would
contribute to creating the false impression of WEF's initiative being
the same kind of multistakeholder activity.
Greetings,
Norbert
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list cs-coord at lists.bestbits.net
For list archives, member roster, unsubscription and other functions visit:
http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/summit
Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
____________________________________________________________
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
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140904/b67a39c4/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
More information about the Governance
mailing list