[CS Bureau] Re: [Working Methods] Quick check-in

[Adam Peake]

>Adam:
>
>perhaps the lack of activity - of responses, and details on what is 
>happening - might be due to christmas?



Robert,

(I'm not cc'ing all replies to the bureau list -- keep discussion 
about working methods to the working methods lists.)

Of course I understand about holidays, and that when people devote a 
great deal of time to a bureau meeting or other CS activity they then 
have to catch up with other work and life at home.

And I want to be clear that my comments are not intended as criticism 
of any person. I am often amazed by what we are able to achieve, 
usually as the result of hard work by a few.

Anyway, see email below.

Thanks,

Adam




>To: bureau at wsis-cs.org
>From: Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>
>Subject: RE: [CS Bureau] TR: CSB Cape town
>Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:35:08 +0900
>
>Dear Viola, Renata:
>
>Thank you very much for organizing the meeting.  Viola in particular 
>for the preparations: always hard to arrange people's travel, visas, 
>accommodation, etc. And seems an amazing job was done with 
>translation and note taking: could you describe how that worked, is 
>it something we could duplicate during prepcoms and other meetings? 
>(What would it cost :-)
>
>Fully support suggestions to shrink the size of the bureau.  As well 
>as those families that don't respond by December 31st, perhaps some 
>of those that do could be encouraged to think about merging. 
>Building around a core of regional groups might be effective?
>
>I think the original proposal to create a CS bureau suggested 10 families:
>
>1. Academia and education
>2. The science and technology community
>3. The media
>4. The creators and active promoters of culture
>5. Cities and local authorities
>6. Trade Unions
>7. Parliamentarians
>8. NGOs including social groups such as: Youth, Women, Indigenous, 
>Disabled, etc.
>9. Social movements
>10. Multi-stakeholders partnerships
>
>Add regional families (+5)
>From the list cut "Parliamentarians", and make Gender, Youth and 
>People with Disabilities families in their own right (+2).  Do we 
>have enough multi-stakeholders and trade unionists to merit a 
>family? For the rest, they could be rolled up into these, e.g. the 
>family I have been associated with, think-tanks, might become part 
>of the NGO family. Also wonder if there needs to be both NGOs and 
>social movements (NGOs organizations with legal status; social 
>movements, those without.)
>
>14, 15, 16 or 17, still quite large. Then add various liaisons.
>
>Couple of comments on the meeting summary.
>
>The government bureau and WSIS secretariat have spoken highly of the 
>CS bureau, so I think sensible to take these positives and try and 
>build on them.  Try to build on Bureau's successes rather than knock 
>it down.
>
>Pressing tasks:  begin a dialogue with the task force on financing 
>mechanisms to see how civil society can contribute and be better 
>represented there.  I think the Friends of Chair group is also 
>urgent, how can we contribute, CS seems very missing from this. 
>Given Mr. Samassekou's comments about the importance of CS 
>contributions to the Geneva phase documents, we can justifiably a 
>claim that CS will make a significant contribution.
>
>About the WGIG --and I am obviously bias/conflicted on this-- I 
>think we are doing OK and would prefer the Bureau to work through 
>the Caucus. Internet governance is a well established content issue, 
>I am not sure what the Bureau could or should do.  In terms of 
>process --at least process issues in our external relations-- the 
>caucus has been successful so far. For example, I would not like 
>confusion to creep in about who WGIG should contact, etc. When the 
>caucus needs CSB's help we will ask (as we did during the summer...) 
>It is the responsibility of a content group to work via Plenary and 
>content and themes.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Adam
>_______________________________________________
>Bureau mailing list
>Bureau at wsis-cs.org
>http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/bureau