[gnso-restruc-dt] Q2 and names - a possible approach

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

I am wondering whether there is acceptance for the following in this  
DT as a way forward on this question:
- that a house can determine its own name with the approval of both  
SGs in that house.
- that a SG group can determine its own name and that this should be  
part of its board approved charter.
- that a constituency can determine its own name and it  should part  
of its board approved charter.
- that no house, SG or constituency  gets to determine the name of  
another house, SG or constituency.
The Board already determined the split between the houses and the  
stakeholder groups, so, as long as the name does not contradict the  
split, this should not be an issue for by-laws.
In general I also personally advocate a general rule to be followed in  
all matters of "where is X decided?" and that is of subsidiarity in  
that, except for global issues like PDP and Contractual conditions,  
all decisions are made at the lowest unit of organization in the  
bottom up chain.  This includes things like names, methods by which  
houses elect their council vice-chairs, how SG elect their council  
members, etc... With the Board always maintaining its role/ 
responsibility of advice and consent.

a.