ICANN is currently revisiting its policy on providing support for travel expenses, and is considering extending the support it currently offers to the ICANN Board, ALAC, and NomCom to supporting organizations, including the GNSO.  The travel expenses of the councilors of these organizations are inherent costs of ICANN's work, and paying these expenses should be a priority use of ICANN's resources.  Currently ICANN is subsidized by volunteer councilors who provide not only their personal time and effort, but also the funds to travel to meetings on the other side of the world. 

 

This change is especially important as the GNSO moves to restructure its constituencies and strives to increase participation by individuals.  High costs present a bar to participation.  Those costs may well seem reasonable or incidental to those parties who have a large direct financial interest in ICANN policy, but they are disproportionately burdensome to individuals and non-commercial interests.  Since NCUC is the only constituency not supported by commercial interests and large industries, the under-funding of the GNSO has been the single most significant barrier to NCUC participation in ICANN policy making.  ICANN is financially self-sufficient and should bear the costs of its own operation.  Otherwise, only those who can routinely pay thousands of dollars to participate in policy discussions will be able to influence ICANN policy-making.

 

ICANN should fund the reasonable travel expenses of all GNSO councilors, who are all needed to carry out ICANN’s policy work.  The current proposal to pay the travel expenses of half of the councilors is insufficient.  Funding only a fraction of the councilors leaves the process open to gamesmanship and favoritism.  Face-to-face council meetings are essential to the work of the GNSO, and the expense of keeping the GNSO running is as much a cost of ICANN's operation as the travel expenses of the Board or SO chairs.