Page History
...
| Comment # | Working Text Reference | Working Text Page # | Comment Provided By | Comment - Working Party Members Provide Feedback Here | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 99 | Stephanie Perrin | Over my 30 years in the Canadian government I was involved at the working level (Senior analyst/manager/ director) in many international organizations, either directly or as part of a team where other members represented us more actively. This would include the ITU, COE, GATT, trade negotiations such as FTA and NAFTA, G8 and G20 meetings, and notably in my case the OECD and the International Conference of Data Commissioners. In this context, I find the GAC to be one of the more peculiar committees that I have seen. I am curious as to why ICANN responds the way it has done over the past years, and interested in the GNSO efforts to further systematize the way GAC “advice” is analyzed and acted upon. I would suggest that it requires further study. I would be grateful if this committee could point me to further reading on the GAC, its evolution and representation, and the background to the strategic approach which the Board has taken in heeding GAC advice. | ||||||
| 2 | |||||||||
| 3 | |||||||||
| 4 | |||||||||
| (9.3 BGC WG Recommendation 17) We received no comment of any kind on the issue of communication between the GNSO Council and Board members elected from the GNSO. Based on this, we conclude that it is no longer a significant issue | 95 | Chuck Gomes | Were any questions asked of the community on this? | ||||||
| 3 | (9.4.2, Observations) number of survey respondents and interviewees commented on the need to improve the interaction between the GNSO and other SOs and ACs | 96 | Chuck Gomes | In hindsight, it would have been much more effective to separate this by SO and AC. As the comments below illustrate, the responses are heavily skewed in a negative way for the GAC. | |||||
| 4 | (Westlake Review Team Recommendations), work it should consider how the GAC could appoint a liaison (non-voting) to each GNSO PDP WG as a means of providing timely non-binding i | 100 | Chuck Gomes | This recommendation migh t be more realistic if it only related to PDPs for which there is perceived to be significant public interest. It probably will be hard even with that limitation but it would be a little more realistic. | |||||
| 5 | (Westlake Review Team Recommendations) That the GAC-GNSO Consultation Group on Early Engagement continue its two work streams as | 99 | Ron Andruff | Having been actively engaged in discussions for one (or more) GAC members to join the Nominating Committee, the issues govenrments face in providing liaisons to the Nom Com, working groups or other bodies is that no one nation can speak or act on behalf of another sovereign nation. Hence, even if there was a significant number of GAC members in agreement with sending liaisons (and there is no evidence of that as far as I see) there is no current mechanism to effect what Westlake is suggesting. | 5 |
