[gnso-ppsc-pdp] Additional questions
Dear All, On the PDP-WT call today, those present continued reviewing the planning and initiation survey results and a number of questions emerged which all agreed would be of interest to receive further input on. These questions are the following: 1. A majority responded 'yes' to the question whether a 'second opinion' should be possible if there is disagreement with the opinion of the General Counsel's office. However, limited feedback was received on how this would work and who should be in a position to provide such a 'second opinion'. Please share your ideas / suggestions with the mailing list. 2. Currently there is no public comment period foreseen following the publication of the issues report. Should a public comment period be foreseen, and if so, should this focus on the question whether all issues have been covered in the issues report or correcting factual information, or should broader input and comments be solicited at this stage as well? 3. Should constituencies be able to provide input into the drafting of the issues report? If yes, how should input be solicited? Should constituencies volunteer input, should they be requested to provide input following the adoption of a request for an issues report or should staff make specific requests? Please share your views. 4. What would be a reasonable timeframe for the development of an issues report, and the overall policy development process? Attached you will find an overview of the timelines of recent PDPs that might give an indication of realistic timelines for the different stages of a PDP. Please share your feedback with the mailing list ahead of the next conference call on 23 July. With best regards, Marika Attachment:
binegcORPCoLr.bin Attachment:
Timelines PDP.doc |