[WSIS CS-Plenary] In response to Renate's email

[Renata Bloem]

Robert,

First of all, no decisions have been made concerning Bureau composition. My
proposal followed only the very long discussions about the legitimacy (or
lack of)of the CSB, its initial so called "topdown" creation by the
Secretariat. I totally agree that we tried hard to have some procedure in
place to elect, appoint or designate focal points. And in some ways it also
has worked out. 

And maybe I was not quite clear in my short proposal. I meant to say that
most of the "families" turn anyway into caucuses or WGs when they deal with
substance. I therefore did not mean there should be a whole new election
process. Those which are active (and criteria is not only to constantly
comment on these lists!)are anyway on the Bureau already ( be they named
family or caucus focal point)Some which are not active have more or less
disappeared, a.o. by not having produced any report. So it could mean we
just would need one or two focal points from very active caucuses and WGs
which are not on the Bureau, e.g. Finance and the human rights caucus, IGC
already represented by Jeanette. That's all.

I thought my proposal was only simple and logical following the ongoing WSIS
process. 

And I totally agree with you that we should not lose further time on these
discussions. Therefore you don't need to respond before I see you on Monday!
Best
Renata  




Renate Bloem
President of the Conference of NGOs (CONGO)
11, Avenue de la Paix
CH-1202 Geneva
Tel: +41 22 301 1000
Fax: +41 22 301 2000
E-mil: rbloem at ngocongo.org
Website: www.ngocongo.org

 

The Conference of NGOs (CONGO) is an international, membership association
that facilitates the participation of NGOs in United Nations debates and
decisions. Founded in 1948, CONGO's major objective is to ensure the
presence of NGOs in exchanges among the world's governments and United
Nations agencies on issues of global concern.  For more information see our
website at www.ngocongo.org



Reminder: CONGO Postal Address Has Changed

We will soon be unable to receive mail at our old address at the Palais des
Nations in Geneva.  So please make sure to update your records with CONGO's
new Geneva office postal address: CP 50, 1211 Genéve 20, Switzerland.  Our
physical office address is 11, Avenue De La Paix, 1st Floor, 1202 Genéve,
Switzerland.

-----Message d'origine-----
De : plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org [mailto:plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org] De la part
de Robert Guerra
Envoyé : vendredi, 11. février 2005 19:57
À : plenary at wsis-cs.org
Objet : [WSIS CS-Plenary] In response to Renate's email

http://www.privaterra.org/activities/wsis/blog/in_response_to_renate_s_email
.html

In regards to the recent suggestion put forward by Renate Bloem 
regarding opening seats on the bureau to each and every caucus and 
working group..

As I've mentioned before - I have several ongoing issues with the 
bureau that some of which her recommendations address, some of which 
they don't.

A big issue is that important CSB items tend to be not discussed 
openly, but among a small group and then made public when decisions 
are almost already made. Why are well prepared and thought out 
recommendations presented only 3 days before the prepcom and not 
before ? I just like having time - to discuss, consult and come up 
with options.

To be frank - I don't see just simply getting each caucus to appoint 
one member will solve anything. The CSB was created by getting each 
caucus to elect people to serve on the bureau. It took a lot of time 
and energy - consuming almost a week and a half of the precom2 of the 
first phase. Do we need to repeat the same process? Isn't there a 
better way?

Commitment of bureau members to actually do anything has been and 
will continue to be an issue. People might think it's cool or 
politically important to be on the bureau and will want to be elected 
- and then proceed to do nothing at all. Not even a 1/4 of the bureau 
really does anything - having more people on the bureau will only 
make it less effective and less able to accomplish anything. frankly 
- i'd rather have no bureau at all than a large ceremonial one that 
doesn't do anything.

I will say this - one of the criticisms of the bureau is that it 
keeps to itself, and is more a club than anything else. I don't think 
that's the case - but it is how it is seen. If we want to clear up 
that misconception, then there needs to be a frank and open 
discussion as to what currently DOES work, what doesn't and how we 
could reform things . This must not be done among 2, 3 or 5 persons 
but much more openly in a way that gives people time to reflect and 
propose numerous options.

The whole idea to create the CSB was done by a small group of people 
who got together before Prepcom II (feb 03) and then sprang it on the 
Prepcom sucking time, energy away from other items that needed 
attention at the time. The discussions related to finance, governance 
and preparations for the Tunis summit are VERY important and i 
personally would be quite upset if instead CS spent it's time talking 
about bureau elections and bureau reform.

As my theme for the prepcom is - from words to action - i would 
propose that we spend time on developing concrete details, roles, 
responsibilities that should be done by bureau members and a timeline 
with specific commitments that need to be accomplished. If bureau 
members don't meet targets, and can't comply with and commit to CS 
values of openness, transparency, responsibility and human rights 
then they should be off the bureau.

that's how i feel
-- 
###
Robert Guerra <rguerra at privaterra.org>
Privaterra - <http://www.privaterra.org>
_______________________________________________
Plenary mailing list
Plenary at wsis-cs.org
http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary