Hi,


On 01-Mar-14 17:55, Stephanie Perrin wrote:
> Interesting.  Is it likely we will see that this time around as well?
> Got any suggestions as to how I distance myself from this kind of
> policy laundering?  Given the lack of clarity about the high level
> multistakeholder committee, I am already suspecting something like
> this will be passed in front of us for endorsement, likely at the
> meeting because we dont appear to have a prior role.  Makes getting
> alternative text in by march 8 all the more important, if there is no
> faith in the process.... Stephanie

You have no agreed language that binds.  WGEC does because we are a UN 
process, and they have rules about the sanctity of agreed language, even 
when that langauge is just a declaration and not a treaty.

Perhaps you can build on the idea that WGEC is considering a 
recommendation that there be follow discussions among all stakeholders 
on stakeholder R&R and how could you do any less.  And that therefore 
they should also endorse that in perhaps even stronger terms.

If we can into our May meeting with y'allhaving strengthened our 
language that would be cool.  And helpful.  If you weaken it or ignore 
that will cause pain.

cheers

avri