Looks ok to me and I agree with Robin -- pretty much aligned with the draft RySG statement. frt rgds --c.a. On 08/08/2014 05:52 PM, Robin Gross wrote: > Should have sent the draft text along also: > > > DRAFT > Proposed NCSG Statement on ICANN Staff’s Accountabillity Plan v.01 > > The NCSG appreciates this opportunity to provide feedback regarding the > ICANN staff’s proposed plan for “Enhancing Accountability” at ICANN. > > NCSG notes its disappointment, however, with the staff skipping the step > of providing a synthesis of the community feedback received from the > ICANN public comments forum and the London accountability discussions, > as staff had stated it was working on during GNSO Council and SO/AC > leadership calls since the London meeting. NCSG reiterates its request > to see that synthesis of public input upon which staff relied in the > formulation of its accountability proposal. It is impossible to know > where the components of staff’s proposal come from and on what basis > they are called for without being privy to staff’s assessment of the > public input on the subject. At a time when the world is indeed > watching ICANN to discern if it can be trusted with no oversight of its > global govern functions, and particularly on the issue of formulating a > proposal for resolving ICANN’s accountability crisis, to skip the step > of providing the intellectual justification for staff’s proposal seems > imprudent at best. From its inception, the community should have been > engaged in the formulation of the proposal on the table, not pressured > into signing-off on a staff created proposal at the 11th hour. This is > an example of top-down policymaking which engenders mistrust. A number > of public comments and discussion in London were around the inherent > conflict of interest behind staff developing its own accountability > mechanisms so it was disappointing to see that input hadn’t been taken > into account by staff in the development of this proposal. > > Regarding the substance of the staff proposal, the NCSG does not support > it as currently drafted. Of particular concern is the proposed > Community Coordination Group, which would prioritize issues identified > by the community and build solutions for those issues. As proposed by > staff, this group is too heavily controlled by the ICANN board and staff > and so it does not remove the problem of ICANN’s accountability > structures being circular and lacking independence. Given the > overwhelming number of public comments submitted supporting the need for > an independent accountability mechanism, it is unclear on what basis > ICANN staff proposed a solution in which the ICANN board and staff would > fill a large number of the seats on the CCG. It is also unclear on what > basis staff thinks board-picked advisors should have an equal vote as > representatives of community members. Outside experts are welcome and > can provide valuable input, but they should be selected by and report to > the community, not the board or staff for independent accountability to > be achieved. And advisors role must be clarified as an informational > role, rather than a voting role that representatives of stakeholders > would hold in a bottom-up process. It is also necessary that the role > of any ICANN Board or Staff on this CCG serve in a non-voting support or > liaison function. For the CCG to have legitimacy as a representational > form of democracy, its voting members must consist of representatives of > the stakeholders that ICANN seeks to govern, not the ICANN board and > staff. The make-up and roles of the members of the proposed CCG must be > reformulated in a more bottom-up fashion by the community for this > proposal to be acceptable. > > > On Aug 8, 2014, at 1:02 PM, Robin Gross wrote: > >> Here is a link for an open Google doc to draft the NCSG accountability >> proposal stmt: >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Imjv-1teQYTjlYDncRLzj1YF3SXedF5nVJg7UAYOIXs/edit?usp=sharing >> >> I've taken a first stab at crafting something to get us started. >> Editors and others who wish to contribute, please hack away! >> >> Thank you! >> Robin >