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