When Council considered the motion to approve the draft CCWG charter, Gabi raised the representation concern, saying: We agree with parity when it comes to consensus calls/voting. We object to disenfranchising chartered constituencies in the GNSO, which is the effect of limiting to 5 representatives from the GNSO. There are 7 chartered GNSO groups (Registries, Registrars, BC, IPC, ISPC, NCUC, NPOC). So 2 chartered organizations would not get a representative on the CCWG if it is limited to 5 reps. Heather Forrest of IPC supported us. Avri Doria (NCSG) disagreed with us, saying the extra reps would lead to chaos on CCWG. Avri suggested the CSG chose not to have a SG structure, so it’s up to us to get our house in order. James Bladel disagreed with us. Tony Holmes supported Gabi’s concern and said we needed to address this issue since it will come up again. Drafting team chair Thomas Rickert clarified that the charter permits each CONSTITUENCY to participate in every discussion and email list, even if the CSG gets only one vote during consensus calls Gabi also raised our concern about timing: BC members believe that the goal, as drafted, overstates the need to meet the so-called deadline of September 2015. It is more important that we get the right accountability enhancements, and that they are supported by the community. Thomas replied that the charter encourages CCWG to meet the Sep-2015 goal but is not prescriptive. The quality of the work is the decisive factor. The CCWG will determine its own outcome on the question of timing. Council approved the Charter and also approved Thomas Rickert as GNSO co-chair for this CCWG.