[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