[council] ICANN Durban - GNSO Council meeting with the Board

["Jonathan Robinson" <jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

All,

 

As you know, Durban is approaching and we have the great opportunity of an
hour and a half with the ICANN Board.

 

Background

 

In my time on the Council, our meetings with the board have mostly comprised
an agenda made up from topics sent in both directions which the Council has
then worked to develop our position on, typically on the Saturday of the
weekend session.  I feel that these have been characterised, in part, by
both the Council and the Board "throwing topics over the fence" and, at
times, these have been lacking in strategic thought and / or thorough
preparation by the Council.  Also, the tone of the meetings has felt in the
past, to me at least, to be a little antagonistic and not in necessarily the
spirit of moving a topic or topics forward.

 

Prior to Beijing, I met with Steve Crocker and discussed with him some of
the above and part of the outcome of that discussion was a suggestion that
the Council come to the board with topics.  We did this through a softer
introduction by me and then got into the "meat in the sandwich" via an
intervention by Jeff (I recall).  We went on to have a good discussion on
some critical issues.  The discussion was firm but reasonable and the
feedback I heard afterwards from both councillors and board members was
largely if not universally positive.

 

Towards Durban

 

I intend to meet with Steve again before Durban if possible, at least
through a telephone conversation.  Before doing so, I would like to be sure
we are heading in the right direction and so would appreciate your input.

 

As chair, my feeling is that we should enter the discussion with an
objective.  What do we want to communicate and how do we want to achieve
that?  

In this context, we may also think what we do not want to do / achieve and
how to make sure of that.

 

My sense of what we should try to communicate is the following:

 

1.       A dynamic and forward looking GNSO Council that is actively seeking
to undertake productive work in the interests of a successful
multi-stakeholder model.

2.       A vigilant and responsible GNSO Council with some specific and
reasonable issues / concerns that will benefit from being aired and
discussed.

 

Assuming the above, what is the purpose and substance of 1 & 2.

 

1.       Dynamic and forward looking GNSO Council - Direct communication of
activity and taking feedback

a.       Key relationships

                                                               i.
Within the Council & GNSO

                                                             ii.      With
ICANN staff

                                                            iii.      With
others in the ICANN ecosystem
(Actively reaching out to Board, GAC, ccNSO, other groups to participate in
joint initiatives)

b.      Operational productivity and efficiency initiatives

c.       Critical new / forward looking initiatives
(in addition to "regular" policy work)

                                                               i.
Development of a set of principles to guide (cross) community working groups

                                                             ii.
Initiation of a WG to examine and develop critical issues around policy and
implementation

                                                            iii.
Awareness of forthcoming reviews (of GNSO & GNSO Council) and willingness to
anticipate these

2.       Vigilant and responsible GNSO Council - Able to coherently
highlight critical issues, discuss these and move the agenda forward

a.       The MS model is critical to the "defence" of ICANN, the MS Model
needs to be upheld

b.      BB

c.       CC

 

Summary

 

My belief is that we have an opportunity, and should seize it, to
communicate positively and in a way which we are most likely to be engaged
with productively.

I think the issues raised and discussed in 2 above will benefit from the
context of 1 and so a structure along the lines above will work and will
welcome your feedback.

 

Please note that 2 may contain one or more topics.  I have suggested one so
far since it links to our discussion, both in Beijing and subsequently, and
could do with being moved on / developed.

 

Look forward to your feedback and input on the above.

 

 

Jonathan