No wonder the time line doesn't work, I have no clue how I can write a Minority Report on a Final Report which is not Final. Let me just go on record with the formal objection in case we poll. el On 2016-02-17 14:27, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:
Dear Co-Chairs
Now you have a problem. A significant number of us do NOT agree with the Board’s proposed modification of the spill power post-Board acceptance of GAC advice. A number of others apparently do agree with this further change from the closed text of Rec 1. It appears as though the supplementary proposal is not complete. I, personally, would take what was in the compromise proposal – the same “all but one objecting SO/AC” standard – that is in the current draft (which, I note, has not been released).
If you are going to think about changing the draft (as you are free to do), I would respectfully request a full proposal fromteh Board (text and justirifcation); two readings; and the development of consensus one-way or the other. We should not adopt the Board’s proposal at all – but if we do, it should not be in this higgledy piggledy haphazard way of having the Board liason communicate an idea that is only clarified in email converations.
Where is the redline text? And when is the consideration?
Paul [...] -- Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar) el@lisse.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell) PO Box 8421 \ / Bachbrecht, Namibia ;____/