[Mmwg] Reviewing the discussions

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

I tend to agree that the bureau should not be the one adopting  
reports, or perhaps i mean to say not the only one.  I think they  
should initiate and perhaps manage the formation of working [groups,  
teams, parties  ...].  i do think there needs to be a way for the  
plenary to review and consent to any final documents.  this process  
can perhaps be overseen by the bureau, though maybe it only needs to  
be coordinated by the secretariat.

btw, i think to avoid confusion, we might want to call it a bureau in  
our work, since that is called out in the tunis agenda.

a.


On 25 jan 2006, at 10.11, Milton Mueller wrote:

> Vittorio:
> These comments are quite clear now, thanks.
>
> Actually there is only one significant modification. You agree with  
> my original proposal that UN SG appoints the initial Bureau (no  
> difference here). And you agree with my initial proposal that the  
> initially appointed Bureau later gets selected by its constituents,  
> in a way determined by sectors. The only difference is that you  
> want the Bureau to adopt documents, instead of the Plenary-Chair  
> interactions -- and you don't like the word "Bureau" (let's call it  
> the "Council," then, ok? ;-)
>
> I am strongly opposed to having the Bureau/Council adopt reports. I  
> suspect Luc would be, too. That sets them up as a detached, free- 
> standing group that would inevitably draft, modify and publish  
> reports on their own. The point of investing time and energy in  
> working groups and the Plenary would be seriously undermined.
>
> It is very much a WGIG model you propose. The Bureau/Council is  
> just another WGIG. I would prefer something more open, more  
> participatory, less susceptibly to domination by a small clique.
>
>>>> Vittorio Bertola <vb at bertola.eu.org> 1/25/2006 9:17 AM >>>
>> In any case, my main modifications would be:
>> - appointing WG Chairs and adopting documents falls within the  
>> mandate
>> of the Bureau (I would rename it to something less bureaucratic,
>> please!)
>
>
>
> - initially, the Bureau is appointed by Annan with balanced
> representation among the 3 stakeholder groups (WGIG-like)
> - then, each of the groups comes up with proposals on how to select
> future Bureau members, which are to be adopted by the Bureau
> Is this clear enough?
> -- 
> vb.             [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org] 
> <-----
> http://bertola.eu.org/  <- Prima o poi...
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmwg mailing list
> mmwg at wsis-cs.org
> http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mmwg
>