RE: [gnso-osc-ops] substitute members in the council

["Ray Fassett" <ray@xxxxxxxxx>]

My counter point would be that what we are doing is creating tools,
mechanisms for each SG/Constituency to be able to participate with.  From
there, the Rules place the autonomy upon the SG/Constituency to administer.
So, to each of your questions, I think each SG/Constituency can decide
independently and autonomously in ways they believe serve their respective
needs.  All that we are doing, from the RoP, is making the tools available
which today do not exist.  This was the point to the idea I was making that
there is the individual's obligation as a Councilor to Council activities
(kind of your point that I acknowledge) but also an SG/Constituency
obligation.  What we understand is that in practice the individual is
sometimes unable, including for reasons out of their control, to fulfill
their individual obligation w/o any remedy for the SG/Constituency to
fulfill theirs.  So we are, from the RoP, prescribing some tools, some
options, to be able to do so, which do not exist today...but stopping short
of scripting in such a way as to in effect remove autonomy from the SG based
upon whatever the instance is about, which we know can vary widely, case by
case.  Is this expanding the Council or are these ways to invite or
encourage participation from each SG, while clearly placing the burden on
the SG to admninister?

On the one hand, we've taken a hard line that the denominator will not
change in any instance.  I support this as I think most of you know.  The
balance, and to me the fair balance, is to also come back and say "there's
no reason as an SG you could not have participated, tools are available that
you did not do".  Further, I think once each SG understands that there are
now such rules, they will look to incorporate and I think this is overall
healthy.

Lastly, remember too, that the Council is to act as the manager of the
policy process, not determining policy.  In other words, far more an admin
role.  I get the potential for gaming.  But I would be more concerned about
this if the Council member's role was about determining policy which is in
part what this entire process is about changing.  If it works in practice,
as we certainly should assume today, then I am less concerned about the
potential for gaming what is an admin role and more inclined to take steps
that provide for inclusive participation w/o compromising SG/Constituency
autonomy from the RoP.

Your points are well taken and please continue not to give up...these are my
views as a WT member (not its Chair).  Thoughts welcome...

Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 10:22 AM
To: gnso-osc-ops
Subject: [gnso-osc-ops] substitute members in the council


hi,

I believe that during yesterday's meeting we effectively increased the
effective size of the council.

Why do i say this?

because given the history of absences and given the new opportunity to
establish a stand-in for whenever participation is made difficult by travel
or my schedule rotation,  the SG can appoint a stand-in.   and there will
almost always be one or more stand-ins participating in some aspect of the
council's business.

The question then becomes - what are the rights of these substitutes.
Obviously they can vote.  Can they participate in the discussions? Do they
attend the entire meting? Do they have to be included in all meeting
announcements?  Do they have the right/responsibility to correct or annotate
the minutes of the meeting?  If the substitution is because of extended
travel, do they get added to email list and allowed to participate in the
discussions?  Can a substitute vote on an PDP issue when an absentee vote is
mandated?  if so what does this mean about the validity of the PDPd vis a
vis consensus policy on issues inside the picket fence?  how does the
secretariat confirm the rights of the substitute - if she does not receive a
note from the Chair in time, is the substitute disallowed?

Sorry I can't let this rest, but the more I think about the meeting and our
discussions, the more questions I have.  And unfortunately I think the path
we are taking will require us to document the answers to many of these
issues.  I know that the fact that the contracted parties have so few
representatives was my reason for agreeing it made sense to allow all of
this substitution, but I worry about the box of knots we have opened.

a.


a.