Re: [council] Topic for Senegal Board-GNSO Council Meeting
Hi Jonathan, They redirected and Council failed to push back. I actually thought it was pretty impressively executed. Was the PDT news a surprise to anyone? I had assumed this was precisely what Kristina wanted to talk about… Bill On Jul 19, 2011, at 11:35 AM, Jonathan Robinson wrote:
My perspective on the board discussion in Singapore was that it was very unsatisfactory.
We went down the path of discussing or possibly the board responded by discussing the issues around confidential information and the effectiveness or not of staff contracts in dealing with this.
My understanding was that the issue we had intended to discuss was conflicts of interest, particularly for ICANN board and senior staff / executive management, and what if any, effective corporate governance was in place to manage and deal with this.
If I am correct in my understanding, we were either insufficiently clear in communicating our topic of discussion or alternatively, the board was unwilling or unable to discuss it. Regardless, I agree with Stéphane that there was a distinct sense of “closed topic”.
The big question really revolves around corporate governance best practice at ICANN. How well is this understood, managed and kept current?
Trust that this input provides a little further insight.
Best wishes,
Jonathan
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder Sent: 19 July 2011 07:14 To: Rosemary Sinclair Cc: Rosette, Kristina; council@gnso.icann.org Subject: Re: [council] Topic for Senegal Board-GNSO Council Meeting
I agree that clarifications would be useful here.
We discussed the revolving door issue with the Board in Singapore. I don't know about others, but I got the feeling the Board felt that all that there was to say on the subject had been said.
Of course at the time we were talking about ICANN Staff, not Board members.
So Kristina and others, if you could be more specific on the actual wording of the topic you are requesting for the Dakar agenda, I'm sure that would be useful to Jeff, who is handling our agenda for Dakar.
Thanks,
Stéphane
Le 19 juil. 2011 à 00:12, Rosemary Sinclair a écrit :
Hi Kristina et al
Would you mind giving us some more background on the concerns here?
I might not be thinking about the right problem...
Thanks
Rosemary
Sent from my iPhone
On 19/07/2011, at 12:12 AM, "Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@cov.com> wrote:
I'd like to see the revolving door topic on the agenda again, please.
http://www.tldh.org/2011/07/peter-dengate-thrush-appointed-as-executive-chai...
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6304 (20110718) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
It was news to me. Was it common knowledge or rumour well in advance of the announcement? Jonathan From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of William Drake Sent: 19 July 2011 10:50 To: GNSO Council List Subject: Re: [council] Topic for Senegal Board-GNSO Council Meeting Hi Jonathan, They redirected and Council failed to push back. I actually thought it was pretty impressively executed. Was the PDT news a surprise to anyone? I had assumed this was precisely what Kristina wanted to talk about Bill On Jul 19, 2011, at 11:35 AM, Jonathan Robinson wrote: My perspective on the board discussion in Singapore was that it was very unsatisfactory. We went down the path of discussing or possibly the board responded by discussing the issues around confidential information and the effectiveness or not of staff contracts in dealing with this. My understanding was that the issue we had intended to discuss was conflicts of interest, particularly for ICANN board and senior staff / executive management, and what if any, effective corporate governance was in place to manage and deal with this. If I am correct in my understanding, we were either insufficiently clear in communicating our topic of discussion or alternatively, the board was unwilling or unable to discuss it. Regardless, I agree with Stéphane that there was a distinct sense of closed topic. The big question really revolves around corporate governance best practice at ICANN. How well is this understood, managed and kept current? Trust that this input provides a little further insight. Best wishes, Jonathan From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder Sent: 19 July 2011 07:14 To: Rosemary Sinclair Cc: Rosette, Kristina; council@gnso.icann.org Subject: Re: [council] Topic for Senegal Board-GNSO Council Meeting I agree that clarifications would be useful here. We discussed the revolving door issue with the Board in Singapore. I don't know about others, but I got the feeling the Board felt that all that there was to say on the subject had been said. Of course at the time we were talking about ICANN Staff, not Board members. So Kristina and others, if you could be more specific on the actual wording of the topic you are requesting for the Dakar agenda, I'm sure that would be useful to Jeff, who is handling our agenda for Dakar. Thanks, Stéphane Le 19 juil. 2011 à 00:12, Rosemary Sinclair a écrit : Hi Kristina et al Would you mind giving us some more background on the concerns here? I might not be thinking about the right problem... Thanks Rosemary Sent from my iPhone On 19/07/2011, at 12:12 AM, "Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@cov.com> wrote: I'd like to see the revolving door topic on the agenda again, please. http://www.tldh.org/2011/07/peter-dengate-thrush-appointed-as-executive-chai rman-of-tldh/ __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6304 (20110718) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6306 (20110719) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com
participants (2)
-
Jonathan Robinson -
William Drake