So, far, then it's Sophia, Marilyn and Maureen who have volunteered. But I have a request before there is any creation of a small working group or even an initiative- discussion and prioritization, consideration of what is feasible, and staff support needs. In addition to our own discussion, I do suggest that we discuss this with the General Counsel of ICANN. We need to considering our work priorities - everything is important, and there are practicalities to consider before launching a work initiative. We have a Operational Plan and an emerging StratPlan for the Council. As we come up with great ideas for more work initiatives, we should consider how they fit into the overall work plan and priorities - and even perhaps maybe part of other work initiatives It is easy to launch new initiatives, and we need to consider resourcing of our staff support as well. I would think that we would want to have a discussion with the GC and also perhaps discuss with the ccNSO, how they see addressing this issue. Just a comment: A discussion with the GC is essential. Sarbanes Oxley is a rather burdensome "test", and not really developed quite for the "organization" that ICANN is. Further, ICANN 's community, and its leaders and its participants will by nature have many many interests. - and thus there will by nature be conflicts. Understanding whether these are of the nature that require recusing oneself from a vote, versus the need to fully disclose the relationships -- for instance, councilors may have clients who have interests in the policy outcome - that would by nature be all registrars and all registries - and many others within the constituencies. That isn't a bad thing. But should be a transparent thing. As we all know, it isn't only financial commitments that bring conflicts of interest, and that influence "interests". So, even though we have three volunteers, I suspect that we should really have a discussion with the full council before we hove off into a working group, and we need to understand the priorities of work, what resources are needed, whether this is part of our changes of council before we complete "review", etc. Still, I'm volunteering. Grant, can you also post the InternetNZ Councilor's process to the email string - just for informational purposes? Marilyn _____ From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of ICANNSoph Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2006 9:04 PM To: Maureen Cubberley Cc: Marilyn Cade; Cubberley, Maureen (CHT); ross@tucows.com; Bruce Tonkin; council@gnso.icann.org Subject: Re: [council] Conflicts of Interest Bruce, I also want to share my experience in working in the development and implementation of conflict-of-interest (COI) issues within my career in Audit and recently, within the framework of Sarbane-Oxley legislation in various orgs, which should be useful for us. I would like to volunteer along with Maureen in contributing on the proposed task force for the design of COI. Basically, COI exist when professional judgement concerning one interest tend to be unduly influenced by another interest, be it within individuals or institutions. Despite anyone's profit or gain, the appearance of COI (as we say in Audit) is as destructive of confidence as actual gain or profit. In our case, while not a regulatory mandate, it would be an institutional statement of ethical standards based upon the act of total objectivity with regards to ICCAN's interest. Regards, Sophia On 21/01/06, Maureen Cubberley <m.cubberley@sympatico.ca <mailto:m.cubberley@sympatico.ca> > wrote: During my CIRA Chair days, we developed a conflict of interest policy, with the assistance of one of the country's leading legal firms. Ross, would CIRA be willing to share its policy with the Council? Maureen ----- Original Message ----- From: Marilyn Cade <mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com> To: 'Cubberley, <mailto:MCubberley@gov.mb.ca> Maureen (CHT)' ; ross@tucows.com ; 'Bruce Tonkin' <mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au> Cc: council@gnso.icann.org Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 3:38 PM Subject: RE: [council] Conflicts of Interest I'm also interested in supporting the development of an effective Interest Statement, and a discussion of what creates a conflict that requires a recusement, versus a disclosure. Also, we should examine how we implement such a program. Grant has shared with the BC the way that InternetNZ addresses, and perhaps there are other useful models also about to quickly get a sense of. Marilyn -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto: <mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Cubberley, Maureen (CHT) Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 11:04 AM To: ross@tucows.com; Bruce Tonkin Cc: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: RE: [council] Conflicts of Interest Bruce and Ross, Thanks Bruce for bringing this proposal forward. I too think this is an excellent idea, and Ross, I agree with your further analysis. In particular, I agree that the GNSO council should move ahead with a conflict of interest policy, and an appropriate process to accompany it. As you know, this is an issue that I brought up at the meeting in Vancouver, at which time I cited the Board conflict of interest policy and asked for clarification as to whether or not it applied to the Council. Now that we have our clarification, we should move ahead. I like your" light weight" approach and also the concept of a design committee. I support the idea of adding this to the next agenda, so Bruce, if that is acceptable and if the Council as a whole agrees to proceed, I would be pleased to volunteer to work with fellow Councillors on the proposed "design committee" or with whatever development approach is decided upon. Best regards, Maureen -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Ross Rader Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 8:57 AM To: Bruce Tonkin Cc: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: Re: [council] Conflicts of Interest Bruce Tonkin wrote:
I see this being a voluntary initiative as there doesn't seem to be any explicit bylaw requirements.
Bruce - I think this is an excellent proposal. As you know, the registrar constituency has had similar practices embodied in its bylaws for a number of years. However, simply because the bylaws is silent on a specific set of behaviors, doesn't mean that we can't officially adopt these behaviors through other means. I also believe that it is time for the Council of the GNSO to adopt some explicit conflict of interest management processes - but I believe they should be mandatory. At first, we should proceed cautiously with these. A light-weight approach would seem to be most prudent. Over time, we could improve and expand upon the approach in ways that make it more useful for our purposes. My preference would not be to create a "design committee" to come up with a comprehensive proposal at this time. As a first step, I think your proposal makes eminent sense, and I would like to discuss whether or not the rest of the council would be willing to undertake a vote to make these requirements mandatory. Is this something that we could add to the agenda of our next meeting? Thanks in advance for your consideration. -ross -- Sophia Bekele Voice/Fax: 925-935-1598 Mob:925-818-0948 sophiabekele@gmail.com <mailto:sophiabekele@gmail.com> SKYPE: skypesoph www.cbsintl.com <http://www.cbsintl.com/>