RE: [council] GNSO review - principles for discussion

[<tony.ar.holmes@xxxxxx>]

Philip

I could certainly support this approach, it puts the right perspective
on the debate and defines a workable structure when we consider aspects
of the review. It's never wise to start any debate with a resolution and
I was surprised at the speed we hurtled down that path this time.

On the issue of voting, I don't believe it was ever envisioned that
approach would be adopted across the board on aspects outside of policy
development. There appears to be no justification for that, so again I
support the proposed methodology.

Tony

 .
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard
Sent: 10 November 2006 09:42
To: 'Council GNSO'
Subject: [council] GNSO review - principles for discussion

Dear Council members,

I feel we should set ourselves some principles upon which we wish to
further discussion on
matters connected with the two reviews of the GNSO Council and the GNSO.

Allow me to propose some.

DISCUSSION BEFORE RESOLUTION

Council should have discussion on selected topics first.
Then there should be time to air that discussion with Constituencies and
other parties.
Then Council should discuss the outcome of that wider discussion.
Then Council may consider a resolution.

VOTING

When Council takes any vote, be it indicative or not, the voting basis
will be one person,
one vote.
(There can be no justification for having the policy-related double
voting for certain
constituencies for matters such as GNSO review. To do so would be
especially ironic
considering the review proposes the removal of such double votes.)

QUORUM

A proposal for priority discussion should be proposed and seconded and
then supported by a
majority of constituencies before it is added to a Council agenda.
(This should help us to discuss the important things first).

Are we all in agreement with the above ? Are there other principles to
help us in our work?

Philip