[WSIS CS-Plenary] FWD: Re: [CS Bureau] Draft minutes for today's CSB meeting

[Jean-Louis FULLSACK]

I fully support Magaly's request on more transparency in CSB functioning and for a serious discussion/debate within the CS Plenary -the only body empowered to take a decison in the name of the WSIS CS- on Geneva Action Plan implementation and WSIS follow-up mechanism(s)  Especially for the latter, PrepCom-3 didn't formulate a clear position, due to the lack of clear proposals to the CS by the Working group B. This gave some "liberty" to its chair, Bertrand, to engage on such tracks as "Global Alliance" and similar "inconsistances" that never were discussed in CS Plenaries and came out of the hat in a "last minute" statement.
The WSIS follow-up process is a complex one and the mechanism(s) aren't the only issue and even not the main issue, since WSIS is to be more (preferrably) or less integrated in the MDG agenda. 
Best
Jean-Louis Fullsack
CSDPTT.  





> Message du 14/11/05 14:01
> De : mpazello at oi.com.br
> A : plenary at wsis-cs.org
> Copie à : 
> Objet : [WSIS CS-Plenary] FWD: Re: [CS Bureau] Draft minutes for today's CSB meeting
> 
> [Please note that by using 'REPLY', your response goes to the entire list. Kindly use individual addresses for responses intended for specific people]
> 
> Click http://wsis.funredes.org/plenary/ to access automatic translation of this message!
> _______________________________________
> 
> Dear CSB members,
> 
> I'm quite surprise again and dissapointed with how decisions are made
> within CSB, in special related the famous sunday meeting. Is very sad
> to see that the bureau is not working in an open and transparent way.
> 
> Proposal and demands sent by me was not taking in account:
> a) to held the first CSB meeting just on Monday lunch time;
> b) to point out what is in the CONGO's undrestanding really very urgent
> within the agenda;
> c) the correct time of the meeting despite the proposal to postpone it.
> 
> I'm surprise even more because CONGO dind't sent the announcement of the
> sunday meeting and the correct time. The last message sent by Phillippe
> on this topic inform that the bureau meeting on Sunday at 10:30. But
> the meeting was hold at 15:00. Why it was not announced in the bureau
> mailing list? I couldn't find out its annoucement. Why I was not advise
> of that yesterday when we met?
> 
> I make a proposal trying to reach a time slot that the members that is
> also involved in the advocacy work could attend the bureau meeting too,
> but my messages was not taking in account. It is uncceptable at this
> point. I strong call to recover the transparency of this work otherwise
> it will be a shame.
> 
> BTW: I want to express my position related to the decision agreed on
> Sunday: I disagree with the CSB request the floor to speak in
> Sub-Committee B, if the caucuses and groups want
> to make a statement on follow-up mechanism must do that as we always is
> doing as Caucus not as CSB. Include because is necessary discuss what
> wich caucus and families think about could be the best mechanism for CS
> participation. And it needs to be discussed in the plenary. There is no
> reason to do that and it is not the CSB mandate. Nothing against the
> speak it self, I disagree with the way and on behalf it was proposed
> tol be done. So this decision need to be revised urgently.
> 
> Magaly
> 
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20051114/2a83df47/attachment.htm