[gnso-restruc-dt] Background on fundamental pre-conditions

["Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>]

"Milton asked:
Philip:Please inform this group of where this commitment (about NCUC membership 
expansion)
is articulated." 
----------------------------------------------------
Background note on current proposed structure of the GNSO

The agreement by commercial users to transfer 3 commercial seats to 
non-commercial users (in
the existing reform proposal) has its origin in a joint paper from the ALAC, 
NCUC, BC, IPC,
and ISPs. That paper was called:
"Joint Proposal from the User Community for GNSO Council structural change 
April 2008".
It was negotiated inter alia by Milton Mueller on behalf of NCUC.

In the INTRODUCTION we find:
"The role of individuals and the At-Large is inappropriately curtailed in the 
governance
committee proposal. Since ALAC is critical to ICANN?s external perception this 
needs to be
clarified".

In the BODY we find:
"Non-commercial interest group The Board governance committee recognized that 
it ?must go
far beyond the membership of the current Non-Commercial Users Constituency.? 
ICANN has
invested substantially in developing an At-large structure to represent users. 
That
investment should be leveraged".

IN the ANNEX we find:
"Non-Commercial Interest group. Principles
§       The group should be an umbrella organization based on the non-commercial
constituency and incorporating At Large Structures, public-interest oriented 
individuals and
individuals drawn from the Regional At-Large Organisations with an updated 
program and
membership scope. The exact details of this can be determined after the Board?s 
agreement to
the concept in principle. 
§       At-Large has interests beyond GNSO policy so it is NOT intended to 
formally merge
the At Large Advisory Committee, ALAC, with this group. Indeed no decision 
regarding GNSO
Council restructuring should prejudice the role of any ICANN-wide users? 
entity".

------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is this agreement to which the BC, IPC and ISPs refer when we question 
whether this
change in the NCUC has occurred.
It may have done. It may be a communication issue.
But:
a) we nor the Board have seen the evidence.
b) it would be more indicative of change if the voices that told us there has 
been change
were today (May 2009) not the same ones as then (April 2008).