<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">There are two aspects to the
coordination group task, and it helps to keep them separate. <br>
<br>
The group is to coordinate submissions from stakeholders, and that
includes group members making sure that the stakeholders they
represent (as well as other stakeholders) make submissions and are
kept abreast of the work of the coordination group. The role of
constituencies here is to feed suggestions to the group and
monitor its progress. Just as Milton is carrying out the
responsibility of keeping the non-commercial constituencies
informed, and prompting them to respond by being engaged, the GAC
members of the coordination group have the same responsibility
toward the GAC constituency. This is not a numbers game. <br>
<br>
The other aspect of the coordination group’s task is to draft a
proposal that is close to what the British call a “Green Paper”, a
document that has both recommended elements of a transition
proposal, and identifies areas yet to be sorted out. It would be a
mistake for either the coordination group, or the stakeholder
constituencies, to assume that the initial outcome from the group
would be a consensus document being offered for a yea/nay response
from both the multistakeholder community and the U.S. Government.
To take that path would probably take longer to reach a good
consensus proposal than following a schedule using the Green
Paper/White Paper (proposal doc) strategy. <br>
<br>
Sam L.<br>
<br>
On 13/07/2014 10:44 AM, Avri Doria wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:53C29B4B.5020907@acm.org" type="cite">
<div class="moz-text-plain" wrap="true" graphical-quote="true"
style="font-family: -moz-fixed; font-size: 14px;"
lang="x-western">
<pre wrap="">Hi,
On 13-Jul-14 10:13, Norbert Klein wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">
<pre wrap=""><span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>More important is that the NTIA transition mandate says clearly that
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>governments and inter-government organizations cannot have a role in the
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>outcome. The GAC should be reminded about this.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
I do not read it that way.
It can't be a intergovernmental solution.
I take that to allow for a multistakeholder solution that includes
governmental actors in some form or configuration. I.e governments
should be able to have a role just as the other stakeholders are allowed
to have a role.
avri
</pre>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
------------------------------------------------
"It is a disgrace to be rich and honoured
in an unjust state" -Confucius
------------------------------------------------
Dr Sam Lanfranco (Prof Emeritus & Senior Scholar)
Econ, York U., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - M3J 1P3
email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Lanfran@Yorku.ca">Lanfran@Yorku.ca</a> Skype: slanfranco
blog: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://samlanfranco.blogspot.com">http://samlanfranco.blogspot.com</a>
Phone: +1 613-476-0429 cell: +1 416-816-2852</pre>
</body>
</html>