Notes 23/11 Meeting

1. Introduction & Welcome of New Members

Welcome of new members joining today's meeting: Phil Corwin, Paul McGrady, Jorge Cancio
CG is response to recommendations of previous ATRTs as well as desire of GNSO and GAC to explore mechanisms to facilitate early engagement
CG operates in a similar way as a WG, but is called a Consultation Group. Membership is balanced between GAC and GNSO.
Initially the CG was meeting every two weeks, but the CG changed the frequency to every three weeks to accomodate workload and other activities such as transition. Proposal to continue with this schedule (meeting on Tuesday's at 14.00 UTC) which would hopefully give the CG at least 4 meetings between now and Marrakech (15 Dec, 5 Jan, 26 Jan, 16 Feb - plus possibly an additional meeting before Marrakech if needed)
Develop a workplan based on these meeting dates including proposed deadlines and deliverables for those dates
Need for more interactive discussion on the mailing list while calls should be used to converge on views. Ensure maximum participation in the calls. Schedule will be shared so that everyone can reserve it in their calendars.

Action item: review call schedule and indicate if you are unavailable for a certain date/time.

2. Review & discuss outstanding work items:

Review of GNSO Liaison to the GAC (see note circulated)

Appointment is from middle of the year
Ideally conclusions & recommendations of review presented to GAC and GNSO prior to Marrakech meeting
Comments / responses from Manal and Mason have been incorporated in this version
Consider whether it would be worth translating this into a table format
Consider applying pre-emptively for funding under the SO/AC Special Community Budget Requests for FY17
CG to go through questions systematically and develop responses.
Also review other engagement mechanisms such as the quick look mechanism to ensure holistic approach to review. Consider whether both should be institutionalised at the same time?

Action item: CG members to review document and feedback provided by Mason and Manal and share perspectives on the mailing list.

Action item: translate document into table format

Review of Quick Look Mechanism (see memo)

CG expected to review after at least 3 PDPs/QLM and make recommendation whether or not to keep, update or discard QLM
Staff developed document with status to date and feedback from its perspective on QLM
Consider whether this document can be translated into a similar format as the review of the GNSO Liaison to the GAC
Manage expectations so that it is clear that substantive input is considered by the PDP WG

Action item: Everyone encouraged to review the memo and provide their perspectives on the QLM

Review remaining PDP Stages and possible enhancements to facilitate GAC early engagement (see flow chart distributed)

Ideas / suggestions for possible enhancements have been included in red
Initiation phase - invitation to join DT in those cases in which GAC provided positive response to QLM and/or requested the Preliminary Issue Report
WG phase: GAC to provide substantive input to WG if response to QLM was 'yes', followed by review of how WG has addressed comments received and provide additional input if deemed necessary. GAC to give further consideration to the time needed / required to be able to provide substantive inputs and whether any other triggers are needed than the QLM. From a WG perspective, the earlier the input is provided the better. GAC is expected to use existing WGs where available and appropriate to provide substantive input such as public safety WG, but this is being evaluated on an ongoing basis. Should CG consider recommending that a dedicated WG is formed within the GAC to follow work of PDP?
Still need to consider what should happen if after all these steps there is still disagreement between GAC and GNSO.

Action item: All to review proposed engagement opportuntities and provide feedback on the mailng list.

3. Confirm next steps & next meeting