[CS Bureau] We must engage in dialogue, be able to communicate better...

Wed Jan 12 16:14:33 GMT 2005

Renate:

sigh !

Am I not clear enough, need I go into more details...sigh!

At the cape town meeting several items where discussed, and it was - 
implied - that further comments and/or details would be forthcoming 
from those involved.  Those items include, but are not limited to the 
following:

* DETAILS - on :

a. the agreement on how the CSB secretariat  as presented (on the 
very last day in cape town, and in the last minutes of the meeting) 
is being envisioned.

As you may remember, Ann-Kristin Håkansson and I expressed shock at 
the way the announcement of the CSB secretariat was made. Obviously 
it wasn't something that developed and came into being all of the 
sudden  - likely, it was well known before the cape town meeting and 
should have been mentioned the first day we where all there.

This would have given us time all to comment - and would have given 
at least the impression that our voices, our comments count for 
everything

Again, Ann-Kristin, myself and others - were surprised, actually 
quite shocked  that time had been taken to - write a proposal, speak 
to funders, and obtain funding, all without a word to the bureau 
list. Worse still, when funding had been obtained it would have been 
seen as appropriate to open the "new job opportunity" to  an audience 
that has been involved in the wsis process.

Other organizations and structures that exist in the wsis process 
such as the CRIS, the youth caucus, the gender caucus, GKP and many 
others  - have posted their announcements, their "recruiting for paid 
people" to the list - why was this not done in this case? Is it that 
the person being funding needs to come from a certain organization? 
Despite "reputation" your organization might have - doing all this 
almost in secret , is not consistent with the policies put forward by 
CS in the WSIS process of inclusion, openness and transparency.

To me what appears to have happened is that a virtually unknown 
person , unknown to the wsis process has been hired. They will have 
to spend time to learn things, find out about people, topics and 
learn the network. But TIME is something we don't have - we need to 
get started, to hit the road running to get things done

The reply you back to me with, the high level outline on what the 
person will be doing , in my opinion still very, very general. To be 
honest, i expected more details. if this is to be the only paid 
person - i think that it's way too much for the person to do.  Are 
the items prioritized in one way or another? is there a set of 
objectives to follow, of timelines to meet?

Perhaps you think these are too many questions - but, i think i have 
the right to ask. If - as was stated at the cs bureau meeting - that 
the "staff" person is seconded to the CSB, then CSB members should be 
able to ask questions ,contribute comments and be actively engaged in 
preperations.

If the person is - NOT seconded to the CSB,  then please - do let us 
know, as it is the assumption the rest of us are operating under.

b. Bureau Reform - we mentioned that inactive focal points would be 
cut and the bureau size reduced.

This is related to Adam's earlier message also about reform and 
working methods ...

There has been no news, no updates, no discussion - has nothing changed ?

if there are details - then would be good to know

c. Several offers have been made to the bureau in regards to 
resources to use to help improve communications and documentation.

- Website:

Ramin mentioned something related to a website offer.  I have posted 
several messages to that effect as well. where are we going with this?

- Virtual Discussion:
There was a kind offer by Derrick to help with virtual participation. 
A message was sent around to accept his offer. Derrick is back next 
week - would be good to give him the bureau's green light to proceed.

d. Working Methods

Several questions where referred to the working methods group created 
at the Berlin meeting in November. That group is quite active, and it 
would be good if at least a few other bureau members participated in 
that discussion.

e. Travel issues

As you recall, concern was raised about how to respond to issues 
related to states that might pursue a policy of infringing on the 
human rights of CS involved in the WSIS process.

Does the bureau wish to act in this regards, or would it not be more 
effective to ask the human rights caucus to deal with the issue?

f. Funding

PrepCom 2 is coming and there is no news on additional funding that 
may be available (in addition to the ITU travel fund) that CS members 
might be able to apply for.

g. Political Issues

  A much thornier and problematic topic that was also discussed in 
Cape Town is the one of a "political head" for the CSB.

There were grave concerns also expressed about the issues - both 
past, and present related to this topic. There was a commitment to 
develop a procedure, a process on how to mitigate and deal with this 
in the future. But - nothing has been discussed...Perhaps it's too 
early? perhaps a decision has already been made? not knowing - is 
what's worse.

In summary,

Like I have mentioned earlier , but in simpler terms - the amount of 
detailed information many of  us thought would be forthcoming is not 
coming. Communication - real communication and discussion between 
bureau members, to be honest leaves a lot to be desired.

Making a quick phone call, chatting online , and/or other numerous 
methods - ie. ICTs... - could be used to improve the situation - that 
they are not is troubling. Given the subject matter of the UN process 
we are involved in - the information society  - any lack of 
information gives the impression that a concerned policy of 
concealment is in place.

I would recommend that a key item for us to purse in the immediate 
next couple of days is to try to schedule an online discussion - 
perhaps even an online chat - to follow-up on the key questions left 
unanswered at the Cape town meeting. I would like to have something 
organized in this regard by next week (19th jan). I don't think it is 
unreasonable.

To wrap up, I would like recall a quote that Adama Samessekou made at 
the Cape Town meeting:

"We have have concerns, suspicions, and animosity between each other. 
However, the more that we have worked side-by-side together, the more 
that we have been building human relations. ...

We have to combat rumors.  We don't want people to be able to able to 
point fingers, and say that they are not represented.  We must say 
what we think, and do what we say.  If there are misunderstandings. 
Dialogue can resolve all "

At 1:16 PM +0100 1/12/05, Renata Bloem wrote:
>Robert,
>
>I sent below once more the note from 5.January with some additions. 
>Adina will then be in contact with all of you and send a provisional 
>state of art of logistics for PC2, as well as a report on the GFC 
>meeting. We need now to constructively work together, particularly 
>after decisions made at Cape Town.
>Best
>Renata
>

-- 
###
Robert Guerra <rguerra at privaterra.org>
Privaterra - <http://www.privaterra.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/bureau/attachments/20050112/7449fa75/attachment.htm