Sent on behalf of Sebastien Ducos
Dear RDRS SC,
Please find below the link to the Draft of the RDRS SC Findings Report. Thank you all for your hard work and constructive feedback in this endeavour.
Important updates to consider:
- The report starts with Assignment 4 (the Recommendations) and goes “backwards” in chapters 4-1.
- In limited instances, Support Staff has adjusted text such as introductions, conclusions etc., for consistency, flow,
and removal of duplicative text and unnecessary repetitions. However, the substance has not changed.
- Support Staff has also included line numbering for easier identification of comments. Tables don’t have line numbers,
but can be referenced based on page number and row.
- An SC member noted that the table in Chapter 4 could be clearer, particularly in the specific direction of what the
SC believes should happen to the SSAD Recommendations. To that end, Support Staff and SC leadership added an extra column with Level of Effort to signal to the Council the anticipated level of policy effort involved in a proposed modification or adjustment.
- Support Staff has also updated the comparison table as suggested by Sarah for comprehensiveness and to avoid duplication.
- Leadership suggested to include the metrics of Chapter 1 (up to June 2025) in the Annex and has provided additional
text in the Assignment 1 Section to explain what the SC did in terms of Metrics review.
Please note: To streamline the process and ensure
all input is captured consistently, the current working document - the “consolidated version”- will now be closed for comments. This is to avoid duplication or fragmentation of feedback. From this point forward, we ask that the SC focuses exclusively on reviewing
the updated version that will be shared mid-week.
Commenting Procedure Moving Forward
- As we approach the finish line, we are also adjusting the comment process. SC members will now have “comment-only”
access to the document rather than editing rights. This helps staff better track outstanding issues and prioritise them for SC discussion.
- As done in the past with other WGs, we are asking SC members to focus on three types of comments:
· Text
you cannot live with
· Text
you can live with but think needs clarification
· Any
grammatical or formatting errors
- To support this, staff has prepared an overview/exercise document to help organise your input. Pending Comments
from the previous draft are already included in the review document. That said, we understand this format may not work for everyone, so you’re welcome to either comment directly in the report (as comment) or use the review sheet. Staff will ensure
all comments are collected and included.
- When providing comments, please include a clear rationale and proposed alternative text. This is crucial to
help staff fully understand your concern and to support us in drafting language that accurately reflects SC consensus.
- For example, if you cannot live with a particular phrase, please explain why and offer a suggestion for what would
be acceptable. This clarity is key for constructive progress.
Please note, the SC input is essential not just to improve the report, but also to keep the SC’s work on track. The SC is operating on a tight timeline,
and it’s important that comments are clear, specific, and constructive. This will help the SC move forward efficiently and avoid revisiting the same points.
We now have four more weeks to review the report. Based on the current timeline, I plan to take a consensus call the week of 11 August, one week
before the public comment period begins. Advance notice will be given if adjustments to that timing are needed.
Thank you all again for getting us to this important milestone. I look forward to continuing this work with you and bringing it to a close when the
time is ready.
Regards,