Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter

["WUKnoben" <wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I’m fully agreeing that this discussion is needed. We might also compare the 
SCI status with the SIC (on board level)
Best regards

Wolf-Ulrich



From: Mike O'Connor 
Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 2:34 PM
To: WUKnoben 
Cc: Julie Hedlund ; gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx 
Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council 
Chair re SCI Charter


On Jul 4, 2013, at 2:16 PM, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


  I don’t think resubmitting a motion is outside the scope of the present 
charter because submission and handling of motions used to be part of the 
improvements process (council operating rules).

i think there's an underlying question of intent.  it's true that almost 
everything the GNSO does was touched by those committees that sprang out of the 
Board review.  but that's the equivalent of saying that everything is touched 
by the Constitution of a country.  i think this goes back to the framers of our 
charter.  what did they intend and why?

a broad interpretation of the charter is:

- the SCI has a broad mandate to review the operation of the GNSO
- it lives forever (it is an ongoing function)

a narrow interpretation is:

- the SCI reviews issues arising *directly* from the work of the prior 
committees, and is the last committee in that series
- it ends, after completing those reviews (it is a project)

i think a lot of things get easier once that basic clarification is made.  
decisions about the skills of the group, tasks it takes on, expected 
deliverables, etc. all get a lot clearer.  perhaps we could frame the question 
the the Council this way?

mikey

 
  In addition the two bullet points – at least from my point of view – do not 
limit the SCI existence because of the periodic iteration.

  Nevertheless the general question should be discussed. I wonder whether we 
could achieve in Durban a general “go ahead thinking of a broader SCI scope” by 
the council and after a while coming back to the council with concrete 
suggestions. I doubt that we can expect more guidance.

  See my comments below

  Best regards

  Wolf-Ulrich 



  From: Julie Hedlund 
  Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 5:15 PM
  To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx 
  Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair 
re SCI Charter

  Dear SCI members,

  As discussed in our meeting yesterday, below for your review is a draft 
message alerting Jonathan that the SCI would like to discuss the issues 
concerning the SCI Charter with the Council during the working session in 
Durban.


  Please send any comments by Friday, 05 July.


  Best regards,


  Julie


  Julie Hedlund, Policy Director


  ----------------------------- Draft Message to Jonathan 
------------------------


  Dear Jonathan,


  As you know, the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) will 
provide an update on its work to the GNSO Council in Durban on 13 July.  One of 
issues the SCI is considering is an update of its Charter, as we have reported 
previously.  This began as an effort to update the Charter to include 
procedures to elect the SCI Chair and Vice Chair, but recently the SCI also has 
considered whether other updates are necessary.  After discussing possible 
updates the SCI members realized that they need guidance from the GNSO Council 
as to whether the SCI's work should be limited to a review of the procedures 
developed in the GNSO Implementations process, or whether the GNSO Council 
intends for the SCI to address other procedural issues not related to the 
improvements process. WUK: One such example might be the re-submission of a 
motion, which is an issue the Council asked the SCI to address and for which 
the SCI currently is considering revised procedures.


  The current Charter states:
  "The GNSO Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI) will be 
responsible for reviewing and assessing the effective functioning of 
recommendations provided by the Operational Steering Committee (OSC), Policy 
Process Steering Committee (PPSC) and Policy Development Process Work Team 
(PDP-WT) and approved by the GNSO Council:

    a.. On request for those recommendations that have been identified to 
present immediate problems 
    b.. On a periodic timescale for all recommendations in order to identify 
possible issues and/or improvements (subject to a clear definition by the SCI 
on which recommendations should be reviewed)"


  The SCI seeks guidance from the Council on what is its intent with respect to 
the duration of the SCI work. WUK: Should the SCI cease to exist when it has 
completed the second bullet above from the Charter? Or Should the SCI continue 
indefinitely to consider procedural questions as raised WUK: the by the GNSO 
Council or a group Chartered by the Council? 


  It seems that these fundamental questions need to be addressed before the SCI 
can consider revisions to the Charter.  The SCI members look forward to 
discussing these questions with the Council in Durban.


  Best regards,


  Ron


  Ron Andruff, Chair, SCI


PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP 
(ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)