Hi James,

Note that the Intersessional will not be an open meeting. It will be
only for very limited number of participants, carefully calculated to
keep stakeholder groups and constituencies in balance. In effect that
means councillors and ExCom members only.

As for accessibility of the location, that's the key reason for
Reykjavík. In particular CSG people do not want to go far from USA,
whereas we wanted to get away from USA for once. Reykjavík was
suggested because it's not in the USA yet easily reachable from there,
sort of midway point between USA and continental Europe. Given the
demographics of the people who are expected to attend, it would not be
easy to find a place with shorter average travel times.

Of course it isn't good for everyone, of course it's really bad for
Japan and Australia, but the only realistic alternative is USA again.
At least Reykjavík would be a precedent of getting out of USA - next
time we could try push for Singapore or Australia or Japan or The Gambia
or wherever.

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen

On Nov 23 09:16, James Gannon ([log in to unmask]) wrote:

> Hi All,
> 
> I note that the intercessional planning is underway still, can we have an update on where we stand with this and why we are still pushing to have it in Iceland rather than a more accessible location for everyone, Im not sure where the idea that we should be pushing for Iceland came from and I don’t know if its really reflective of what people want to be honest?
> 
> I think those of  us considering attending should really be consulted on this as to what is best for us instead of ploughing ahead with locations that are impractical and suit the needs of a small group within the NCPH?
> 
> -James