I agree with Norbert that NCUC should support Philip's email regarding the un-necessary rigidity of the travel policy proposed by ICANN staff and the need to press staff to respond to the GNSO.
ICANN staff dictating policy to the GNSO exemplifies the "bottom-up" approach to policy-making ICANN's PR office issues so many press releases about....
Robin
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Subject: [council] Community Travel support Procedure for Mexico City
Date: Friday, 9 January 2009
From: "Philip Sheppard" <[log in to unmask]>
Denise,
further to our Council discussion yesterday could you please elicit a response to resolution
2 of the Council motion on travel support passed at our December 18 meeting?
This is Council's response re Mexico City and the deadlines you referenced.
Many thanks.
Philip
-------------------
Whereas:
Council welcomes the fact that ICANN have allocated some funds for GNSO travel.
1. Council regrets that the current proposal imposes administrative difficulty and may thus reduce the total budget available.
2. Council calls upon ICANN staff to nominate by 15 January 2009 a fixed sum for fiscal year 2009 that will be granted to each of the constituencies currently recognized under the ICANN by-laws of 29 May 2008. Such sum should exclude any budget to cover the costs of nom com delegates or GNSO chair travel.
3. Council requests Constituencies to publish the names of all those who receive travel support together with a list of the relevant meeting(s) for which the support was given and which were attended by the support recipient.
The motion unanimously passed by voice vote