RE: [gnso-wpm-dt] WPM Section 6 and ANNEX: 29 March Versions (KBv6)

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Ken.  Excellent work.  Please see a few responses below.
 
Chuck


________________________________

        From: owner-gnso-wpm-dt@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-wpm-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ken Bour
        Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 6:41 PM
        To: gnso-wpm-dt@xxxxxxxxx
        Subject: [gnso-wpm-dt] WPM Section 6 and ANNEX: 29 March
Versions (KBv6)
        
        

        WPM Team Members:

         

        As a result of our teleconference today, 29 March, I made the
following changes to our current drafts of Section 6 and the ANNEX (now
combined into one document labeled KBv6):  

         

        Section 6:  

        1)      6.1.1:  Change footnote to "will be discussed..."

        2)      6.3:     Change "Section" vs. "paragraph"

        3)      6.3.1:  Remove "Difficulty" and all additional
references to it in both documents.

         

        ANNEX:

         

        1)      1.2-b:    After "...Council approval", add:  "If any
objection is raised, Councilors will be polled to determine support."

        2)      Step 3:  If a Councilor misses the 10 day window for
providing individual project ratings, that omission will not influence
or be factored in the first analysis used to determine initial
agreement.  During any group sessions, all attending Councilors will be
permitted to participate in the discussion and vote during the polling
rounds even if they did not submit individual ratings when requested to
do so.  [Gomes, Chuck]  I am not sure this is clear enough and
suggestion something like the following: "If a Councilor misses the 10
day window for submitting individual project ratings, the first analysis
will be prepared without those ratings and there will be no opportunity
to provide those ratings in the group session.  During any subsequent
rating exercises in a group session (see Step 3 below), all attending
Councilors will be permitted to participate in the discussions and vote
during the polling rounds even if they did not submit individual
ratings." 

        3)      3.1.1:    Delete "teleconference"

        4)      3.2.2:    Change "two minutes" to "1-2 minutes" in both
instances.

        5)      3.2.4:    Rewrite to impose 1 minute time limit for each
speaker and 5 minute completion target for additional rounds.  

         

        It would appear that we are well positioned to finalize both
Section 6 and the ANNEX at our next session (6 April).    

         

        I will also circulate, under separate cover, a draft letter from
Olga, our Chair, to the GNSO Council transmitting the team's
deliverable.   

         

        Time permitting at our next session (6 April) or, alternatively,
the following week on 12 April, perhaps the team can also discuss any
additional considerations that it anticipates arising, for example: 

         

        *         Training considerations?  

        *         When should the Council undertake its first
prioritization?   [Gomes, Chuck]  I suggest that our goal should be to
submit our proposal for Council consideration in the 21 April Council
meeting and this question should be asked in that meeting with any
recommendations we might like to make. 

        *         As I mentioned on today's call, the GCOT was assigned
the following task in its Charter: 

        "Determine what steps are needed to establish the role of the
Council as a 'strategic manager' of the policy process."
        Does the DT want to make a recommendation to the OSC and Council
as to which team, if not itself, should be tasked with developing the
"managerial" elements that would effectively utilize the
prioritizations?  [Gomes, Chuck]  What about inviting Philip Sheppard
(OSC Chair) and/or Ray Fassett (GCOT) chair to our next meeting to
discuss this.  If we do that, we probably should send them the documents
for their review before the meeting so that they understand the context
for that meeting. 

         

        Congratulations to the WPM-DT for being almost a full week ahead
of schedule!    

         

        Ken Bour