<DIV>I am glad that there is a process for including those CS members new to the process, or reconnecting. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>CS is only going to be as strong as the number of groups that CS can proclaim to represent - not just a couple of voices from a few sectors, regions etc. Support comes from inclusivity rather than exculsivity. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I look forward to reading and contributing to the daily updates. There is a real danger that if transparency is not a key element of the discussions that we will lose credibility.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thank you in advance!</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Amali De Silva-Mitchell, Vice President, Vancouver Community Network, Canada.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR><B><I>Rik Panganiban <rikp@bluewin.ch></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid; WIDTH: 100%">Ralf,<BR><BR>This is good strategic document that I think gets us closer to the <BR>kind of coordinated functioning that Civil Society should aim towards. <BR>However, in terms of what is possible to get together between now and <BR>September, I think your overall scheme is ambitious. Let me suggest <BR>something perhaps more achievable.<BR><BR>COORDINATING GROUP-->> DAILY COORDINATING MEETING<BR>I think the functions of creating an information, coordination center <BR>for civil society are necessary, however having a fully-equipped and <BR>staffed room for the whole prepcom and summit is probably unlikely to <BR>materialize.<BR><BR>On the weekend prior to the prepcom and the Summit, we should have <BR>orientation sessions for those who are brand-new to the process, so we <BR>don't waste too much time re-explaining things. Like past prepcoms, <BR>there should be convened
every
morning a general civil society meeting <BR>where reports from the previous day can be received, general <BR>announcements made, and some discussion of important issues. In <BR>addition, I believe we need at least every other day a session for <BR>newcomers to ask general questions about the WSIS, an open forum with a <BR>couple of veterans who can answer most basic questions that we don't <BR>have time to deal with in the main plenaries.<BR><BR>LOBBYING GROUP->> PART OF CONTENT AND THEMES<BR>I think a lobbying group should grow organically out of the Content and <BR>Themes based on what immediate issues arise each day. Often the same <BR>people in C&T are also the ones doing the most govt lobbying anyway, so <BR>creating a new group with the same people seems redundant.<BR><BR>Respectfully,<BR><BR>Rik Panganiban<BR>WFM<BR><BR>On Lundi, juillet 21, 2003, at 03:19 PM, Ralf Bendrath wrote:<BR><BR>> Hi all,<BR>><BR>> it was good to see many of you in Paris, a
nd I
think in the end we can<BR>> be quite satisfied with what we did. Of course, as usual we could do<BR>> better, especially with more coordination of our activities, a bit more<BR>> transparency and better<BR>> pooling of ressources.<BR>><BR>> This is an attempt to kick off a discussion on CS coordination at<BR>> PrepCom 3, which will also help for the same task at the summit itself.<BR>><BR>> By this I mean the "inside" activities like monitoring, lobbying,<BR>> content and themes drafting, press work etc. The "outside" and "half <BR>> in,<BR>> half out" activities like the Polymedia Lab or the World Forum on<BR>> Communication Rights are already being organized in other spaces.<BR>><BR>> It is not about content, but about how to structure all our work in<BR>> order to be more effective and keep everybody better informed on what <BR>> is<BR>> going on. This should help us enable better and more equal <BR>> participation
<BR>>
of the whole civil society (on location and elsewhere), make better use<BR>> of our ressources, and in the end have a bigger impact on the summit<BR>> outcomes.<BR>><BR>> We should prepare well in advance, that is why I suggest to start this<BR>> discussion now. There are already some deadlines, e.g. Louise from the<BR>> CS secretariat at ITU wants to have a list of what we need from them at<BR>> PrepCom3 by this week. And the impressions from Paris are still fresh,<BR>> so we can better think of what went well and what could be improved.<BR>><BR>> *** Where to discuss this?<BR>> In order to not generate another "Spam" problem on this plenary list, I<BR>> suggest that we set up another list, coordination@wsis-cs.org, and<BR>> discuss the details there. Karen: Can you do this? (BTW: Karen and<BR>> others did a great job coordinating in Paris!)<BR>><BR>> I am looking forward to see your ideas and enthusiasm in helping to get<BR>&
gt; this
going.<BR>><BR>> All the best,<BR>><BR>> Ralf<BR>><BR>> -------------<BR>><BR>> Civil Society Coordination at PrepCom3 (and at the summit)<BR>> Ideas and suggestions, version 0.3<BR>><BR>> compiled by Ralf Bendrath, www.worldsummit2003.org,<BR>> <RALF.BENDRATH@SFB597.UNI-BREMEN.DE><BR>><BR>> 19 July 2003<BR>><BR>> - first draft: circulated in a small group after discussions at<BR>> PrepCom2, February 2003<BR>> - second draft: including written feedback from Karen Banks, Eva<BR>> Hartmann, Rik Panganiban, Chantal Peyer (sorry for forgetting anybody),<BR>> May 2003<BR>> - third draft: updated and refined after further discussions at Paris<BR>> Intersessional, added part III, 21 July 2003<BR>><BR>> Civil Society participation and influence at PrepCom 2 and in Paris<BR>> turned out quite good, though there are some differences on what we<BR>> really achieved. However, a lot of things on our side were d
one on
an <BR>> ad<BR>> hoc basis, and we should think about how to make sure we get this done<BR>> again or even better next time. Some things were not done at all, more<BR>> coordination between the different working groups and a central info<BR>> point for example were clearly missing. And then there are a lot of<BR>> ideas on what could have been done with some more ressources and<BR>> volunteers. This paper attempts to kick of the discussion and<BR>> preparation in time.<BR>><BR>> Content:<BR>> I. Guiding Priciples<BR>> II. Proposed Structure for Civil Society Coordination<BR>> III. What we need from the CS Secretariat<BR>><BR>> -------------------<BR>><BR>><BR>> I. Guiding Priciples<BR>><BR>> We should adhere to some basic principles in organizing our work at<BR>> PrepCom3.<BR>><BR>> 1. Transparency<BR>> If we claim transparency from the governments, we should show how<BR>> transparency could work in o
ur own
actions. This should include:<BR>> - publishing all our working documents (on the web or wherever).<BR>> - having all sessions open and announced in a manner anyone interested<BR>> is able to attend them<BR>> - maybe even having a live-stream from our sessions, like there was <BR>> from<BR>> the intergovernmental plenary at PrepCom2.<BR>> - writing minutes for all our sessions and publishing them<BR>><BR>> 2. Participation<BR>> We should always have in mind the people who are not able to come to<BR>> Geneva. They depend on us for the latest infos on what is going on, and<BR>> we depend on (some of) them for their input and ideas in our lobbying<BR>> work. The "info security" caucus for example consisted at least of two<BR>> persons not present in Geneva and Paris, but who were actively <BR>> involved.<BR>> This principle also should help us think of all the interested people <BR>> in<BR>> Geneva who do not belong to the "
inner
circle" (whatever this is).<BR>> This would not mean using one huge global list, but trying to identify<BR>> focal points who will agree to act as links, who can synthesize,<BR>> summarise and contextualise information coming from the prepcom for<BR>> people at the national level or for specific issue areas, and<BR>> faciliating responses back to whatever mechanisms we agree to setup.<BR>> Whithout these 'animators', who would need to be in place quite soon,<BR>> and who could possibly also need to be resourced, we can't hope to<BR>> really generate any remote input.<BR>> This should include:<BR>> - transparency (see above)<BR>> - possibilities for electronic input (worked a bit via the <BR>> prep1/plenary<BR>> and CT lists, but could be improved)<BR>> - voting mechanisms, in case they are needed?<BR>> - conference calls / videoconferences (like the one CPSR organized at<BR>> PrepCom3)<BR>> - maybe more important: email and
low tech
approaches?<BR>><BR>> 3. Technology<BR>> We should use the summit process for showing how technology _can_ help<BR>> make the world a better place. This would show that it is possible and<BR>> at the same time give our arguments more weight - we are the experts <BR>> and<BR>> the practicioners! This could include:<BR>> - no use of MS word or other proprietary standards. I prefer rtf of<BR>> plain ASCII for the moment.<BR>> - using tech tools for improving transparency and participation<BR>> - using peer2peer technology for distributed work (on the drafts, if<BR>> possible, or on other tasks)<BR>> - live-feed of the monitors in the plenary sessions to IRC or <BR>> elsewhere,<BR>> with the possibility for real-time comments and analysis via the<BR>> internet (I imagine something like this : "ONLINE CS PARTICIPANT FROM<BR>> KOREA: last comment from delegation XYZ is dangerous. It would imply<BR>> ABC, and they have already t
ried
this at the asian regional conf.")<BR>> - have a screen, in a room for CS, which broadcasts comments which <BR>> could<BR>> include extracts from email messages, realtime chats, etc.<BR>> - have a videofeed from the sessions broadcast over the internet<BR>><BR>> 4. Scalability<BR>> Whatever we do should be scalable depending on how many folks we can <BR>> get<BR>> to help out. It isn't fair just to put all the work onto the backs of <BR>> a<BR>> couple of dedicated volunteers. We definitely need more "soldiers" and<BR>> less "generals", as someone put it.<BR>><BR>> 5. Diversity / Representation<BR>> We must do everything we can to encourage/support greater <BR>> participation,<BR>> and create greater space, for organisations and participants from the<BR>> south. We also have to ensure regional and gender balance. The Paris<BR>> intersessional meeting was clearly dominated by people from the North,<BR>> and even at P
repCom2,
where the numbers where more equal, the important<BR>> pulling of strings and the work for the common cause (like reporting or<BR>> chairing) was mainly done by people from the North.<BR>><BR>> -------------------<BR>><BR>><BR>> II. Proposed Structure for Civil Society Coordination<BR>><BR>> This is an attempt to describe what could be done to make full use of<BR>> our possibilities. The general idea is for civil society to be better<BR>> coordinated than the governments and therefore to be able to<BR>> "outmaneuver" them. A structure somewhat along the following lines <BR>> seems<BR>> useful.<BR>> It is so far just differentiated along functional lines. What we still<BR>> need to develop would be some sort of "workflow": How do we organize <BR>> our<BR>> common and coordination work in relation to all the families, caucuses<BR>> and working groups? And what structure for the day would be the best<BR>> (the evening
sessions
in Paris turned out extremely helpful, for<BR>> example)?<BR>><BR>> 1. Coordinating group<BR>> - establish a designated room as information and coordination office,<BR>> staffed during all the summit activities<BR>> - eqipped with computers (yes, and printers), internet, phone/fax, copy<BR>> machine<BR>> - stay updated on all CS activities<BR>> - coordinate / synchronise activities of<BR>> - CS bureau<BR>> - Lobbying group<BR>> - Drafting group<BR>> - Monitoring group<BR>> - Communications group<BR>> - Technical support group<BR>> - Translation group<BR>> - work with CS plenary to develop strategies and tactics as necessary<BR>> - react immediately to important developments<BR>> - ensure that meetings are coordinated and not clashing as often as <BR>> they<BR>> were during PrepCom2<BR>> - answer requests from CS activists and others<BR>> - document CS activities<BR>> - inform the civil society plenary ab
out
their activities and<BR>> strategies, get feed backs from CS in general on their decisions.<BR>><BR>> 2. WSIS Civil Society Bureau<BR>> - fuse input from different CS "families"<BR>> - act as link to governmental bureau, PrepCom3 chairpersons and WSIS CS<BR>> secretariat<BR>> - work on procedures for CS participation<BR>> - act as lobbying group on procedural issues<BR>> - inform the civil society plenary about their activities and<BR>> strategies, get feed backs from CS in general on their decisions.<BR>><BR>> 3. Lobbying group<BR>> - coordinate with monitoring group to identify "friends and foes" and<BR>> "maybes" (maybe one group with monitors?)<BR>> - coordinate lobbying activities of CS activists<BR>> - make sure coherent messages are pushed forward<BR>> - coordinate with CS delegates who are members of national government<BR>> delegations (so far, we know of Switzerland, Denmark, Germany, maybe<BR>> Canada again.
Who
else?)<BR>> - coordinate closely with content and themes group. Proposal: a meeting<BR>> every evening between those two groups to identify the main points on<BR>> which to lobby the next days according to the situation among states<BR>> (lobby/monitor informations) and in the content and themes group.<BR>> - maybe: provide negotiating and diplomacy training for lobbying group<BR>> volunteers<BR>> - inform the civil society plenary about their activities and<BR>> strategies, get feed backs from CS in general on their decisions.<BR>><BR>> 4. Content and Themes Drafting group<BR>> Contact: Sally Burch <SBURCH@ALAINET.ORG>, Bill McIver<BR>> <MCIVER@ALBANY.EDU><BR>> - should have a designated room for their work<BR>> - equipped qith a video beamer<BR>> - translation service on demand<BR>> - fuse input of thematic working groups and caucuses on content, themes<BR>> and action plan<BR>> - react to government drafts<BR>> - dr
aft own
CS summit declaration<BR>> - coordinate with monitoring and lobbying groups for pushing the CS<BR>> ideas at right time and place<BR>> - coordinate with communications group for press releases and<BR>> conferences<BR>> - inform the civil society plenary about their activities and<BR>> strategies, get feed backs from CS in general on their decisions.<BR>><BR>> 5. Monitoring group<BR>> Contact: Rik Panganiban <RIKOMATIC@YAHOO.COM><BR>> - monitor intergovernmental sessions<BR>> - assign volunteers for the time slots<BR>> - alert lobbying and drafting groups on urgent issues<BR>> - produce instant protocols for further analysis and publication<BR>> - Stream protocols via live-feed (IRC?) to the internet; analysis and<BR>> comments could then be produced with participation of remote monitors <BR>> in<BR>> other parts of the world. The question is how much it adds, apart from <BR>> a<BR>> sense of immediacy. After all, if it
is not
possible to respond<BR>> immediately to government even if you are on the spot, then there is<BR>> little advantage to going to a lot of trouble to enable others to have<BR>> the message without the ability to respond. Perhaps it could be used<BR>> selectively, on key decisions. On the other hand, if people take<BR>> electronic notes anyway, why not try a live feed if possible?<BR>> - inform the civil society plenary about their activities and<BR>> strategies, get feed backs from CS in general on their decision. (This<BR>> is less so important for this group, as it mainly provides a service <BR>> and<BR>> does not make real decisions.)<BR>><BR>> 6. Communications group<BR>> - Maintain contacts with press and general public<BR>> - Coordinate with content and themes and lobbying groups on "spin of <BR>> the<BR>> day"<BR>> - Feed the latest info to CS listservers<BR>> - produce and publish press releases / newsletters<BR>>
; -
prepare press conferences<BR>> - coordinate webmasters of different websites. Worldsummit2003.org,<BR>> prepcom.net and crisinfo.org were quite good at this at PrepCom2 and in<BR>> Paris.<BR>> - Observe and analyse news stories on WSIS<BR>> - inform the civil society plenary about their activities and<BR>> strategies, get feed backs from CS in general on their decision.<BR>><BR>> 7. Technical support group<BR>> - Develop concepts for innovative use of tech tools for CS activities<BR>> - Present the innovative use of tech tools to the public, in<BR>> coordination with communications group<BR>> - Provide technical coordination and setup for CS coordination office<BR>> - Act as liaison with WSIS / ITU tech departments<BR>> - Act as help desk for CS coordinating group<BR>> - inform the civil society plenary about their activities and<BR>> strategies, get feed backs from CS in general on their decisions. (This<BR>> is less so imp
ortant
for this group, as it mainly provides a service <BR>> and<BR>> does not make real decisions. But as you know, code is law and<BR>> technology has its own politics...)<BR>><BR>> 8. Translation group<BR>> - coordinate the volunteers onsite and online for translation of CS<BR>> documents and interpretation services. This mainly seems to be needed<BR>> for French, Spanish, Portugese and several Asian languages.<BR>> - coordinate with UN volunteers on this.<BR>><BR>><BR>> --------------------<BR>><BR>><BR>> III. What we need from the CS Secretariat<BR>><BR>> (!! We have to inform the WSIS CS Secretariat - i.e. Louise - by next<BR>> week. Karen Banks is working on this and urgently needs input. !!)<BR>><BR>> 1. designated office space for CS coordination group<BR>> ideally equipped with:<BR>> - at least 10 PCs and a printer<BR>> - Internet Connectivity: wireless and at least 10 LAN cords for laptops<BR>> (wi-f
i did
not work with all laptops in Geneva and in Paris)<BR>> - copy machine<BR>> - telephone and fax<BR>> - flipchart / board<BR>> - located very close to the meeting rooms<BR>><BR>> 2. designated room for the CS Content and Themes Drafting group<BR>> - next door to the CS coordination office<BR>> - reserved all the time only for the CT Drafting Group<BR>> - video beamer for drafting in the group<BR>><BR>> 3. more rooms<BR>> - at least three or four more rooms for meetings of caucuses, families<BR>> etc.<BR>><BR>> 4. translation / interpretation services<BR>> - live interpretation on demand for CT drafting group and caucus /<BR>> family meetings<BR>> - translation service for CS documents<BR>> - languages: at least english, french, spanish. What else?<BR>><BR>> 5. What else???<BR>> _______________________________________________<BR>> Plenary mailing list<BR>> Plenary@wsis-cs.org<BR>>
http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary<BR>><BR>><BR>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<BR>Rik Panganiban email: rikp@bluewin.ch<BR>Special Adviser tel: +41 22 734 9774<BR>World Federalist Movement Fax: +41 22 734 9775<BR>www.wfm.org Mobile: +41 76 473 3274<BR>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR><BR><DIV>
<P><STRONG>Amali De Silva</STRONG> <FONT size=1><EM>AAT(CMABC), BSc(Hons) Econ, PgDip Acc/Fin, MSc Int. Acc/Fin</EM></FONT></P>
<P>Tel: 604-736-9012 & Email: <A href="mailto:amalidesilva@yahoo.com">amalidesilva@yahoo.com</A></P>
<P> </P>
<P><EM><FONT face=Verdana size=1></FONT></EM> </P>
<P> </P></DIV>