Good afternoon: May I say that as long as the Client Committee was conducting a small, low-key procurement exercise, in conjunction with the funding agency, most of us went along with a group of _four_ who appeared to be fit for that purpose. From the moment that the Client Committee becomes the interface between this Counsel and the CWG members and participants, and thus not only transmits but influences the questions and the answers, i.e. policy, that has clearly become no longer the case. A broader based 'interface' is now required. (I note that Sidley Austin thinks that Counsel needs _nine_ participants to address CWG!) For what it is worth, you would also allow me to recall to our American colleagues that the Rest of the World would not appreciate the outcome of the Transition being predicated if not prejudiced in any way by an hassle between various groups of US-based lawyers, some of whom most of us have never heard of before. With best regards to you all CW Begin forwarded message:
