AT-LARGE GATEWAY

At-Large Website

ALAC

RALOs

At-Large Regional Policy Engagement Program (ARPEP)

At-Large Governance

At-Large Reports

Policy Comments & Advice

Working Groups

ICANN Meetings

At-Large Summit (ATLAS III)

At-Large Review Implementation Plan Development

ALAC and RALO Elections, Selections, and Appointments

At-Large FY25 Strategic Priority Activities

Introduction

English

This workspace intends to help prepare the discussion between the At-Large Community and ICANN Chief Financial Officer Kevin Wilson on the Draft Budget for Financial Year 2011 (July 2010 - June 2011) at the ICANN Brussels meeting on Thursday, June 24th 2010. Please add your comments on the draft budget and your questions for Kevin either directly in the comment box below or add them as a comment at the bottom of the page.

Français:

Cet espace de travail est destiné à préparer la discussion entre la communauté At-Large et le directeur financier d'ICANN, Kevin Wilson sur le projet de plan opérationnel et budget de l’exercice fiscal 2011 (juillet 2010 - juin 2011) qui aura lieu jeudi le 24 juin 2010 à Bruxelles. Veuillez s'il vous plaît ajouter vos commentaires sur le budget ainsi que vos questions pour Kevin directement dans la boite de commentaire en bas. Vous pouvez également ajouter un commentaire au bas de la page.

Español:

Este espacio de trabajo pretende preparar la discusión entre la comunidad At-Large y el director de finanzas de la ICANN, Kevin Wilson sobre la versión preliminar del Plan Operativo y Presupuesto para el año fiscal 2011 (julio 2010 - junio 2011) que tendrá lugar el jueves 24 de junio 2010 a Bruselas. Por favor, añadan sus comentarios sobre la versión preliminar del presupuesto y sus preguntas para Kevin directamente en la caja de comentarios abajo. También se puede añadir un comentario al final de la pagina.

Comment Box on Draft Budget FY11 (EN/FR/ES)

Olivier Crépin-Leblond:
1. I do not see any provision or provisional fund for another At Large Summit. I know that the official line is "here's your usual budget, and you can have 'either one, or the other'", needing to choose between a summit, a general assembly, a "normal" ICANN meeting with 25 ALAC members. That's just not good enough. Point blank.

2. There is no provision for At Large growth. What we're seeing here is solely a running budget covering usual expenses. This is akin to running a company with no R&D and capital investments. ICANN's capital is it's people (constituencies), especially At Large. If ICANN does not invest in its At Large constituency (promoting growth, outreach, and supporting them), it risks losing it. This is no joke.

My t-shirt might say: At Large is not there just to make ICANN look good.

Tijani BEN JEMAA:

In the FY 2011 budget, there is no provision for the activities we submitted in our budget proposition for FY2011. Does that mean that all our propositions are rejected? If so, why we didn't get an explanation of this refusal?

Baudouin Schombe:

I propose that it be provided a budget chapter for Als activities in their regions and / or their respective countries in connection with the mobilization of local actors about the many contributions required by the deadlines.

It is very important that from now on, as a budgetary provision be considered for not only well informed but also entrenching the culture of digital technology, particularly research.

This implies that before every international meeting of ICANN, the Als have a packet of information gathered from various stakeholders such as registrars, registries, consumers, developers of web sites, policy makers ..

We still have this problem in most African countries, including a difficult relationship between the institutions, both national, international, regional and subregional. But even worse among national institutions and civil society if it is not an emanation of power in place.

These funds ICANN beside AFRINIC, of AFTLD, ISOC etc. .. will further enable the ALs that can better target the information packets for the participation of local actors to training and the establishment of mechanisms and research strategies that meet local needs.

Wolf Ludwig:

If - as Olivier stated above - an "At-Large growth" is really wanted by ICANN than we need a real working budget for ALAC, its RALOs and their respective activities (projects and outreach etc.). The present funding scheme does not empower the At-Large structure and the people involved. This becomes a question of credibility and its Multi-Stakeholder approach for ICANN!

Fouad Bajwa:

  1. These are my initial interventions for the moment:
  1. With ALAC evolving and growing while extending its outreach to further parts of the globe, it is necessary that ICANN formally accepts that ALAC's financial needs/budget should also increase in view of its current and future growing needs. ICANN should avaoid financial/monetary terms such as mentioning the words USUAL/NORMAL for ALAC budgeting because as ICANN claims to be growing and including more stakeholders, ALAC plays a critical role in ICANN's growth and ICANN should formally recognize this without any further discrimination.
  1. ICANN should formally include funding support for ALAC to organize an At-Large Summit as a regular part of ALAC's organization and activities without any further objections and clearly mention this in the budget plan. When other constituencies have the opportunity to bring in a large number of their members, similar liberty should also be extended to ALAC as soon as possible.
  1. At-Large growth is a fundamental drive of its outreach goals. The budget plan lacks the critically needed provisioning for At-Large growth. Growth should be an addition to the existing running expense coverage and there should be no attempt what so ever to make this claim that At-Large should cover it from its current operating expense/annual budget. As ICANN's capital, it's people and/or constituencies, it is ICANN's immediate responsibility to invest in it's Large-constituency and extensively budget and support its growth promotion, outreach and supporting. At-Large is an important public FACE for ICANN so ICANN should stop making its face look bad! Please!
  1. It is necessary for ICANN to remain transparent and give detailed public responses to why it refuses a budgetary improvement request by At-Large. At-Large is a public face of ICANN and broader participation and thus ICANN has an important transparent accountability for approvals and refusals on budget.
  1. ICANN should include a separate budget chapter in its document for At-Large so that it acts as a transparent view of how ICANN supports financially and extends its bottom-up participation through its public FACE such as the local actors.
  1. ALAC includes various actors in its extensive global stakeholders that participate in ICANN and creates its public face. These include stakeholder groups from various walks of life and cover the diversity of registrars, registries, consumers, developers, technical and non-technical Interent stakeholders and ICANN has publically announced on various occassions that it is taking efforts to include participation from the developing world and the stakeholders that do not have the opportunity to do so on their own. ICANN is reminded of its commitment and responsibility to increase its participation and At-Large plays an important role to introduce new participation into the ICANN process. ICANN should responsibly equip At-Large with both increased financial and other required resources to increase, include and sustain this participation.
  1. Simply said, At-Large requires ICANN of producing a real working budget for ALAC, its RALOs and their respective activities covering new projects and present and future outreach activities and initiatives. ICANN's current budgetary provisions to At-Large do not empower the At-Large structure and the stakeholders involved. This publically becomes a transparency and accountability issue and question for ICANN whehter it is really meeting is claims of increasing global participation and including more stakeholders in its bottom-up decision making approach.

Danny Younger:

The Expense Area Group (EAG) Analysis in this year's budget indicates that $3,945,000 will be expended in support of SSAC activities. The output generated by the SSAC in terms of SSAC Reports, Presentations and Advisories clearly demonstrates that ICANN's investment in SSAC support is a warranted and appropriate expenditure. By contrast, one notes that ICANN will expend $4,440,000 in support of At-Large and ALAC activities and will receive... what exactly? Where is the return on investment? Where are the extensive well-considered and published Working Group reports? Where is the comprehensive analysis of the interests of individual Internet users that are being impacted by ICANN's activities? As I see it, all that gets produced by the ALAC are a few "Statements" that certainly don't warrant a 4.5 million dollar investment. The ALAC receives far more funding than even the GAC and produces far far less. The budget for the ALAC should not be increased, rather, it should be cut by a substantial amount. |

Resources (EN/FR/ES):

Community Calls on the Operating Plan and Budget for FY11:

I propose that it be provided a budget chapter for Als activities in their regions and / or their respective countries in connection with the mobilization of local actors about the many contributions required by the deadlines.

It is very important that from now on, as a budgetary provision be considered for not only well informed but also entrenching the culture of digital technology, particularly research.

contributed by b.schombe@gmail.com on 2010-06-16 10:25:52 GMT

This implies that before every international meeting of ICANN, the Als have a packet of information gathered from various stakeholders such as registrars, registries, consumers, developers of web sites, policy makers ..

We still have this problem in most African countries, including a difficult relationship between the institutions, both national, international, regional and subregional. But even worse among national institutions and civil society if it is not an emanation of power in place.

contributed by b.schombe@gmail.com on 2010-06-16 10:34:54 GMT

These funds ICANN beside AFRINIC, of AFTLD, ISOC etc. .. will further enable the ALs that can better target the information packets for the participation of local actors to training and the establishment of mechanisms and research strategies that meet local needs.

contributed by b.schombe@gmail.com on 2010-06-16 10:48:02 GMT

If - as Olivier stated above - an "At-Large growth" is really wanted by ICANN than we need a real working budget for ALAC, its RALOs and their respective activities (projects and outreach etc.). The present funding scheme does not empower the At-Large structure and the people involved. This becomes a question of credibility and its Multi-Stakeholder approach for ICANN!

contributed by guest@socialtext.net on 2010-06-17 14:49:23 GMT

The "Guest User on Jun 17 7:49am" was Wolf Ludwig

contributed by guest@socialtext.net on 2010-06-17 14:50:23 GMT

  1. These are my initial interventions for the moment:
  1. With ALAC evolving and growing while extending its outreach to further parts of the globe, it is necessary that ICANN formally accepts that ALAC's financial needs/budget should also increase in view of its current and future growing needs. ICANN should avaoid financial/monetary terms such as mentioning the words USUAL/NORMAL for ALAC budgeting because as ICANN claims to be growing and including more stakeholders, ALAC plays a critical role in ICANN's growth and ICANN should formally recognize this without any further discrimination.
  1. ICANN should formally include funding support for ALAC to organize an At-Large Summit as a regular part of ALAC's organization and activities without any further objections and clearly mention this in the budget plan. When other constituencies have the opportunity to bring in a large number of their members, similar liberty should also be extended to ALAC as soon as possible.
  1. At-Large growth is a fundamental drive of its outreach goals. The budget plan lacks the critically needed provisioning for At-Large growth. Growth should be an addition to the existing running expense coverage and there should be no attempt what so ever to make this claim that At-Large should cover it from its current operating expense/annual budget. As ICANN's capital, it's people and/or constituencies, it is ICANN's immediate responsibility to invest in it's Large-constituency and extensively budget and support its growth promotion, outreach and supporting. At-Large is an important public FACE for ICANN so ICANN should stop making its face look bad! Please!
  1. It is necessary for ICANN to remain transparent and give detailed public responses to why it refuses a budgetary improvement request by At-Large. At-Large is a public face of ICANN and broader participation and thus ICANN has an important transparent accountability for approvals and refusals on budget.
  1. ICANN should include a separate budget chapter in its document for At-Large so that it acts as a transparent view of how ICANN supports financially and extends its bottom-up participation through its public FACE such as the local actors.
  1. ALAC includes various actors in its extensive global stakeholders that participate in ICANN and creates its public face. These include stakeholder groups from various walks of life and cover the diversity of registrars, registries, consumers, developers, technical and non-technical Interent stakeholders and ICANN has publically announced on various occassions that it is taking efforts to include participation from the developing world and the stakeholders that do not have the opportunity to do so on their own. ICANN is reminded of its commitment and responsibility to increase its participation and At-Large plays an important role to introduce new participation into the ICANN process. ICANN should responsibly equip At-Large with both increased financial and other required resources to increase, include and sustain this participation.
  1. Simply said, At-Large requires ICANN of producing a real working budget for ALAC, its RALOs and their respective activities covering new projects and present and future outreach activities and initiatives. ICANN's current budgetary provisions to At-Large do not empower the At-Large structure and the stakeholders involved. This publically becomes a transparency and accountability issue and question for ICANN whehter it is really meeting is claims of increasing global participation and including more stakeholders in its bottom-up decision making approach.

contributed by fouadbajwa@gmail.com on 2010-06-19 10:15:33 GMT

Danny Younger's comment:

The Expense Area Group (EAG) Analysis in this year's budget indicates that $3,945,000 will be expended in support of SSAC activities. The output generated by the SSAC in terms of SSAC Reports, Presentations and Advisories clearly demonstrates that ICANN's investment in SSAC support is a warranted and appropriate expenditure. By contrast, one notes that ICANN will expend $4,440,000 in support of At-Large and ALAC activities and will receive... what exactly? Where is the return on investment? Where are the extensive well-considered and published Working Group reports? Where is the comprehensive analysis of the interests of individual Internet users that are being impacted by ICANN's activities? As I see it, all that gets produced by the ALAC are a few "Statements" that certainly don't warrant a 4.5 million dollar investment. The ALAC receives far more funding than even the GAC and produces far far less. The budget for the ALAC should not be increased, rather, it should be cut by a substantial amount.

contributed by guest@socialtext.net on 2010-06-24 00:10:56 GMT

  • No labels