[Chapter-delegates] ChAC Decision Needed: Proposal for greater Chapter participation in developing position & policy briefs

[Satish Babu]

Thanks for this initiative. I consider it very relevant. Some comments:

1. "...with the understanding that staff retains full ownership for the
final version" is overstating the case a bit. Although there is no question
that Staff have to steer the document through multiple consultations with
members (and other stakeholders) to reach a final version, the current
language ("full ownership") does not seem to acknowledge the sovereign role
of the membership. Perhaps a milder reformulation that balances the
respective roles of staff and members would help.

2. Although it's somewhat on a tangent, I would also like to point out that
there is a very real gap in countries where there are multiple Internet
Society Chapters without a 'national' chapter. For instance, India has five
local ISOC chapters, but no national chapter nor a national co-ordination
body. In many countries, there is a role for a country-level civil society
organization for Internet-related aspects that can liaise, co-ordinate and
work in other ways with the national government. This is perhaps a good
role for an ISOC Chapter (or other grouping ISOC structure made of
members/chapters). The risk is that if ISOC does not provide such a
structure, other non-ISOC structures/organizations will emerge to claim
this space.






satish



On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 3:10 AM, CW Mail <mail at christopherwilkinson.eu>
wrote:

> Good evening:
>
> I have read the proposal for greater involvement of Chapters …
> In general I support this initiative, based as it is on one of the primary
> objectives of the Chapters' Advisory Council as proposed in 2010.
>
> I would however suggest that the role of the ISOC staff is overstated in
> the proposed text.
>
> (a)     ISOC staff should act as the secretariat for the membership.
>
> (b)     In most areas of policy, particularly those with a regional or
> national dimension, the staff do not have any better professional or
> political appreciation than our membership.
>
> ( c)    It must be made quite clear by the staff that they do not intend
> to use their safeguards in the present draft text to override the opinion
> of the Chapters concerned.
>
> (d)     Interested Chapters should take the initiative to prepare relevant
> policy statements for the Internet Society either regionally or globally.
>
> Regards
>
> CW
>
>
> On 19 Aug 2016, at 21:11, avri doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>
> > Dear ChAC delegates,
> >
> > The ChAC Steering Committee has reviewed "A proposal for greater
> > involvement of Chapters in the position and policy brief development
> > process"  (below & attached) and is submitting it to the Chapter Council
> > for approval.
> >
> > Decisions by the ChAC are governed by the Rules & Procedure paragraph 6
> >
> >> Substantive decisions, in particular regarding advice and
> >> recommendations, shall be made by the AC. Decisions may be made by
> >> electronic means (e.g. E-Mail, electronic voting systems, etc.) or
> >> during remote (audio/video conferencing) or physical meetings.
> >> Decisions shall normally be taken by consensus (meaning lack of formal
> >> opposition). If consensus cannot be achieved, then the Chair of the AC
> >> Steering Committee shall organize a vote. In case of voting, decisions
> >> shall be taken by a majority vote of the delegates to the AC. The
> >> quorum shall be nineteen (19) delegates. In case of tie, the matter
> >> will be resubmitted for discussion and a new vote. Votes will be
> >> secret. The tally of votes (for, against, abstain, did not vote) will
> >> be published. Abstentions will be counted towards determining the
> quorum.
> >
> > At this point I would like to open discussion on this proposal for the
> > next week - until 8/27 1200 UTC.  At that point I will initiate a
> > consensus call on the document, including any changes that may be
> > warranted as part of the discussion.  This consensus call will also be
> > scheduled for 1 week.  Should the document not meet with consensus, I
> > will then request that we continue discussion on it and will bring it to
> > a vote.
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > Avri Doria
> >
> > (for the ChAC SC)
> >
> >
> > -----
> >
> > *A proposal for greater involvement of Chapters in the position and
> > policy brief development process*
> >
> > *Background*
> >
> > In the past, there have been occasions when ISOC staff met with national
> > policy makers without involving the national chapter in any way. Since
> > national chapters often have good relations with national officials, it
> > would be preferable if the chapters are also involved in meetings with
> > national officials. We propose a recommendation below to that effect.
> >
> > At present, there does not seem to be a consistent practice within ISOC
> > regarding the role of the membership in the policy development
> > process and the preparation of background and position papers that ISOC
> > puts forward. Specifically, some policy papers are submitted to the
> > membership for comment, specifically the policy briefs, while others
> > papers, such as position papers, are not. In one case, the membership
> > was not informed of a specific submission. It appears to us that
> > systematic consultation with the membership can only improve the quality
> > of a policy, background paper, or position paper. The intent is not to
> > change ISOC's current decision-making process for such papers: staff
> > would remain fully responsible for the final version of the paper. The
> > intent is to allow staff to benefit systematically from the views of the
> > membership, and to decide whether or how to incorporate comments from
> > the membership. We propose a recommendation below to that effect.
> >
> >
> > *Recommendations*
> >
> > Review with the relevant chapters, policy positions and alliances before
> > they are made, and inform them of meetings with national policy
> > makers, unless time constraints do not permit it. We have active mailing
> > lists that can make it quick and easy.
> >
> > In general, policy, background and position papers, including policy
> > briefs should be submitted to the membership for comment prior to
> > publication, with the understanding that staff retains full ownership
> > for the final version. Staff can choose the most appropriate method to
> > consult the membership, for example by asking for volunteers to review
> > drafts, by posting a draft for comment to a mailing list, by convening a
> > virtual meeting to discuss the issues, etc.
> >
> > Further, when papers are published and/or submitted to some entity
> > outside ISOC, the membership should be informed and a link to the paper
> > should be sent to the appropriate mailing list and to the Chapter
> > Delegate's mailing list just prior to the publication or submission.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> > https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> > <A proposal for greater involvement of C...brief development process on
> Box Notes.pdf>_______________________________________________
> > As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> > to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
> > Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20160822/5eccc863/attachment.htm>