RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] Q4; In Section 3.1: Question of constituency role
- To: "Gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <Gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] Q4; In Section 3.1: Question of constituency role
- From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 07 May 2009 12:13:32 -0400
Yes, the question was posed by a policy staff, but I believe that while
the decision of what by-law changes we recommend to the Board, belongs
to the GNSO Council based on constituency and community review, the
policy staff does have the ability to bring up issues and ask questions
if they believe it will help us take all the issues into consideration.
That, in my mind, is an important part of the support they should
provide volunteers in our work of making policy.
Another reason for considering the question worthwhile might be that
while many of us understand why being a constituency is so important
even without a direct linkage to Council seats, it seems that not
everyone does. If even the policy staff is not clear on the roles,
responsibilities and advantages between constituencies and stakeholder
groups perhaps there is some more work that needs to be done. And
perhaps some words on the relationship between constituencies and
stakeholder groups would be appropriate for the by-laws.
On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 06:38 -0400, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> I believe this was a question asked by a staff member, not by any
> stakeholders. My answer, which is similar to the one provided on the
> call by someone whose name I do not know, is VOICE. In the NCSG
> charter, for example, Constituencies get a seat on the policy
> committee, and their statements on a policy issue must be included in
> any submissions of SG statements on that issue. They also can propose
> that WGs be formed and the Council reps must follow those
> recommendations once a certain threshold is reached.
> I note that the Board Governance Committee was interested in new
> constituencies ONLY insofar as they expanded representation,
> participation and the diversity of voices. It was not interested in
> new constituencies as an end in themselves (although some staff
> members seem to have erroneously interpreted it that). Detaching
> constituencies from Council seats actually makes it much easier to
> form new constituencies, and thus to get more diversity of voices.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > A pending discussion was: what does it mean to be a constituency if a
> > constituency does not have an automatic seat on the council? In the
> > meeting it was suggested that constituencies provided an organized way
> > for people with similar concerns to participate in the process and in
> > the SGs.
> > Does this need to be described somewhere in the By-Laws?
> > The question also remains on whether any considerations are required
> > within the By-Laws on the relationship between Constituencies and the
> > Stakeholder groups in order to implement the Board's recommendations for
> > increased participation and representation.