[IGFmaglist] For agenda item 3

Lea Kaspar lea at gp-digital.org
Sat May 21 06:09:07 EDT 2016


Dear Lynn, thanks for your responses below.

If Virat's helpful suggestion to pull together an FAQ is taken on, find
here a shared google document that could be used to collaboratively work on
the questions and answers:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/181cN44GBBBM8Bx5EGWg5_AdUgNWO5JP0HZRXPXQuoPA/edit?usp=sharing

I already added most of the info available in the open call, but it is only
a starting point - we'd need to add the questions raised on the thread by
Avri, Elizabeth and others, and make the answers more to the point.

Anyway, hope this helps.

Best,

*Lea Kaspar*

Head of Programmes | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL

Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL

T: +44 (0)20 3818 3258 | M: +44 (0)7583 929216

gp-digital.org

On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 8:09 AM, Bhatia, Virat <virat.bhatia at intl.att.com>
wrote:

>
>
> Dear Lynn,
>
>
>
> Many thanks for your responses to Elizabeth’s email.  I support
> Elizabeth’s request for getting more information / clarity around the
> direction and process that this initiative is expected to take.  I would
> think most stakeholders will need more time than end-May to get nominations
> across.  So any reconsideration of deadline would be much appreciated.
>
>
>
> Like Elizabeth, I would prefer an early  virtual call to clarify issues,
> but if that is not possible, would you like MAG members to put together
> questions and post it online to build some kind of FAQs?   This especially
> as many couldn’t join the call due to technical difficulties.  My excuse
> was 3:30 am J !
>
>
>
> Warmest,
>
> Virat Bhatia
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Igfmaglist [mailto:igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org
> <igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org>] On Behalf Of Lynn St.Amour
> Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 7:15 AM
> To: THOMAS-RAYNAUD Elizabeth <elizabeth.thomas-raynaud at iccwbo.org>
> Cc: IGF Maglist <igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
> Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] For agenda item 3
>
>
>
> Hi Elizabeth,
>
>
>
> saw this after hitting send on my previous mail.  And, again responding in
> my role as MAG Chair and not for the UN secretariat.
>
>
>
> > On May 20, 2016, at 7:40 PM, THOMAS-RAYNAUD Elizabeth <
> elizabeth.thomas-raynaud at iccwbo.org> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Dear colleagues,
>
> >
>
> > After reaching out inside our community, I would like to support the
> call below by Avri and Renata for further discussion of the IGF Retreat. In
> particular there is a need to better understand timing, goals and process.
>
>
>
> This is something that I think would be useful for all of us.  I will
> volunteer to work with the UN secretariat to pull together some additional
> information.  From other discussions, this certainly seems necessary.
>
>
>
> > Could we have a virtual meeting early next week to discuss it?
>
>
>
> If we can continue to deal with any questions/concerns online that will be
> the most inclusive.   Hopefully, the additional information above will
> help.  In any case, I think we should get that out first.
>
>
>
> >  I’ve spent the last two days speaking to people in order to assess the
> community views. The reaction from private sector people keen to support
> but not in the MAG has been surprise that this proposal would land last
> minute with such short notice.
>
>
>
> Agree, the timing is not ideal (for those in the northern hemisphere), and
> the notice is certainly short.   There were several reasons for holding it
> sooner rather than later, some of the reasons I believe:
>
>
>
> - the desire to build on the current momentum from the extension of the
> IGF mandate, and requests to take a longer term view of what we want to
> accomplish,
>
> - an expectation that this retreat will help inform the new project
> description (due in the next few months, I believe).   This project
> description is the document that governs the IGF as an extra-budgetary
> project of the UN.  The old project description expired the end of 2015,
> see:
> http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/2013/TrustFund/Project%20document%20IGF.pdf
> I personally believe it is important to get this as right as possible - it
> governs the resources put to the “IGF Project” and we have operated far too
> short-handed for too long.
>
>
>
> > In trying to address questions they raised, it was clear to me there are
> many still. In particular, I note that I was unable to explain: what
> problem the designation of a different group from the MAG was trying to
> solve; what the urgency of the retreat is; and why the timeline we have is
> so short to offer representatives.
>
>
>
> This retreat addresses more than the somewhat focused responsibilities of
> the MAG, and hopes to address the concerns/suggested improvements from many
> processes and places (as outlined in my earlier email).  And, it really is
> the start of a process.
>
>
>
> >  Speaking about governments, Juan noted on the call that people’s travel
> time is often subject to approvals and based on prior planning. This is
> true also for private sector representatives and surely other communities.
> That this retreat is planned in midsummer for many is also an obstacle that
> will only be compounded by the extremely short timeframe. So I agree with
> the others, it warrants fuller discussion and consideration if we want to
> do it well and with representative participation.
>
>
>
> To be clear, the retreat is not a MAG initiative.  The IGF is convened
> under the UNSG.  And the IGF itself has become more than just the annual
> IGF meeting, hence warrants added attention - and soon.  Many of the
> suggested improvements go beyond the MAG, are expected *now*, and there are
> significant resource implications for the secretariat.   We cannot address
> many of these from within the MAG only.
>
>
>
> >  Irrespective of whether there can be a call, I must also ask for a more
> realistic deadline for communities to come back with nominations to the
> group. Just over a week for this is not a serious option for our community
> and I cannot imagine it is any easier for others. A credible, open process
> that reaches out beyond those already planning to attend as MAG members
> requires more time for people to assess their availability and means of
> travel support etc.
>
> >
>
> > Could we please extend the nomination deadline to mid-June instead?
>
>
>
> I will bring this request forward to the UN Secretariat (Chengetai is on
> holiday until the middle of next week).
>
>
>
> >  Thanks for kindly considering these two requests.
>
>
>
> Thank you for your comments Elizabeth.  I tried to share what I know.
> And definitely agree more information would be helpful.
>
>
>
> More soon
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Lynn
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Igfmaglist mailing list
>
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>
> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org/attachments/20160521/80ff89c1/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Igfmaglist mailing list