[NCSG-PC] Aspirational Statements

[Stephanie Perrin]

Dear NCSG members

For some time, there has been a process going on at the GNSO Council to craft an “aspirational statement” that would encourage members not to vote against the work of Working groups.  This is in keeping with our ongoing work on continuous improvement, and in my opinion may have sprung from recent surprises when work was tossed out by votes in council.  Obviously, we all hate work being thrown out with the bathwater at the last minute, but I have rather consistently spoken against such a statement because I feel we are already constrained by commitments to act in good faith.
Given the rise in small teams to deliver work product to Council, I am also very worried that this “aspirational statement” will be applied to situations where we have been under-represented in the "Working Groups”.  May I add that capitalising a term is very out of fashion in scholarly publication style, and does nothing to clarify its meaning.  

The GNSO Council is the formal body that votes on the results of the PDPs.  I do not believe we should attempt to constrain its ability to vote something down.  I would remind you that the holistic review is coming, and we will need to brush up on all the work that has been done on structural improvements.  I see this as a backward step, weakening the overall policy role of the GNSO.  I would welcome a discussion on this list to see what the members think.  It is up for voting at the next council meeting.

Aspirational Statement
The members of GNSO Council strive to be effective managers of the GNSO Policy
Development Process (“PDP”). As managers of the PDP, the GNSO Council charters Working
Groups in a way that accounts for both relevant expertise and stakeholder diversity within
Working Group membership, then oversees the PDPs’ work throughout the PDP lifecycle. The
GNSO Council recognizes that many deliberations occur within the Working Group during a
PDP, and these deliberations lead to the consensus required for final policy recommendations.
While individual GNSO Councilors and the groups they represent may not fully agree with the
final policy recommendation text, GNSO Councilors strive to support recommendations that
follow the PDP’s consensus-building processes because doing so supports the broader
multistakeholder model. In recognition of the multistakeholder model, when a Working Group
delivers a Final Report with consensus recommendations to the GNSO Council, the GNSO
Council will always try to vote in favor of the policy recommendations absent truly exceptional
circumstances.


Stephanie Perrin
GNSO Councillor