[WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: [governance] IG caucus agenda for Geneva

[avri doria]

On 12 feb 2005, at 16.36, karen banks wrote:

> a clear role and identification of tasks which cannot/are not being 
> undertaken by either the plenary, the content and themes group or the 
> caucuses will make it much easier to decide who should indeed be on it 
> (IMHO)

Maybe it is my simple mindedness, but when i read the material on the 
various organizational entities, i see 4 fairly clear functions that 
need to be covered in addition to a plenary and the subject matter 
caucuses:
  - procedural interface to the wsis
  - inside content coordination
  - process development
  - organization to get work done

in slightly more detail:

- someone to look outside CS and represent it in setting wsis processes 
and procedures etc. I.e. this is the group that needs to do things like 
get greater voice for CS in the WSIS meetings etc, and to coordinate 
the use of the time we get.  i kind of read this as the job of a 
bureau.  i tend not to see this group as the chairs of meetings, but 
more as the interface to the outside.  i think they should be chosen 
for their ability to communicate diplomatically with the governments 
and to represent the CS plenary fairly.

- someone to coordinate the content discussions inside the CS and to 
coordinate the relationship between the various caucuses and the 
plenary.  the C&T looks like this group.

- someone to offload the organizational navel gazing that consumes most 
organizations.  this functions involves looking at how we are organized 
and proposing improvements and structures to fix process that are 
ineffective or broken.  especially in CS, this is an important 
function, both because it needs to be done (this is a complex thing to 
organize properly) and because it is important to keep the plenary and 
other groups from spending all of their time on this instead of content 
and advocacy.

- a secretariat to make sure it all happens.  in terms of chairing the 
plenary, i would most like the chairs to be part of a secretariat, a 
group of people who would be picked for their ability to be organized 
and keep a meeting moving, for fairness and balance, and for the 
ability to communicate and make things happen.

In thinking about all of this, i think it is important that the plenary 
be the final decision point, with everyone else serving at the pleasure 
of the plenary.

just some quick thought from an airport while on my way to meeting.

a.