Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Action: Re-Submitting a Motion

[Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi everyone,

Pending Anne's suggestions for an alternative or amendment to criteria #3, I'd 
like to share one thought on this topic (which I began discussing when I was 
disconnected from yesterday's call).

The incident on the GNSO Council, which prompted the drafting of some sort of 
guideline to refer to in future incidents requiring the resubmission of a 
motion, met with conflicting opinions amongst councillors on wether that 
specific motion should be resubmitted or not (that is if I recall correctly). 
The argument at the time seemed to be that the first criteria the SCI has 
suggested; requiring "a reason to justify the resubmission of a motion" was not 
found to be met by all the councillors, in addition to some of the councillors 
having dropped off the call when the resubmission request had been made (this 
is, of course, covered by the second criteria).

My point is that criteria #1, although stating that reason to justify a 
resubmission must be provided, fails to specify what a justified reasoning 
really is. Criteria #3 doesn't do this either, but at least shows that there is 
some support across the houses to the request to resubmit. I think Anne does 
have a point in the third criteria being too restrictive, however, if an 
alternative is provided, I suggest it somehow addresses what a justifiable 
reason is, and/or demonstrates a willingness amongst councillors to accept a 
resubmission. Is there a reason why the SCI decided not to recommend the 
criteria Mikey dug up regarding a full council vote to determine wether a 
motion may or may not be resubmitted (for example??).

Thanks.

Amr

On Sep 10, 2013, at 10:27 PM, Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Dear Anne,
> 
> Thank you very much today for your suggestions for changes to the procedure 
> for re-submitting a motion.  It would be very helpful if you could consider 
> putting your suggestions in writing, perhaps by providing changes to the 
> existing language.  I have included that language below for your reference.
> 
> Please let me know if I can assist you in any way.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Julie
> 
> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
> 
> Possible Options for Addressing the Re-Submission of a Motion:
>  
> Set one or more high-level criteria (in this order):
>  
> 1)  Provide a reasoning to justify the resubmission of a motion. Complete no 
> later than the deadline for submitting a motion: for inclusion on the agenda 
> as soon as possible, but no later than 23h59 Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) 
> on the day, 10 calendar daysbefore the second GNSO Council meeting following 
> the meeting when the motion first was submitted.
>  
> 2)  Publish the text of the re-submitted motion. Complete no later than the 
> deadline for submitting a motion: for inclusion on the agenda as soon as 
> possible, but no later than 23h59 Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) on the 
> day, 10 calendar days before the second GNSO Council meeting following the 
> meeting when the motion first was submitted.
>  
> 3)  Require a seconder of the motion from each house as a prerequisite for 
> placing the re-submission of the motion on the consent agenda.