Rik's reports from the plenaries have been essential. Very much appreciated=
=2E
Adam
>Delivered-To: ajp@glocom.ac.jp
>From: Rik Panganiban <rikomatic@yahoo.com>
>To: wsis-prep1@cpsr.org
>Subject: [wsis-prep1] Notes from February 28 plenaries
>Sender: wsis-prep1-admin@lists.cpsr.org
>X-BeenThere: wsis-prep1@lists.cpsr.org
>X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8
>List-Help: <mailto:wsis-prep1-request@lists.cpsr.org?subject=3Dhelp>
>List-Post: <mailto:wsis-prep1@lists.cpsr.org>
>List-Subscribe: <https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/wsis-prep1>,
> <mailto:wsis-prep1-request@lists.cpsr.org?subject=3Dsubscribe>
>List-Id: WSIS PrepCom Mailing List <wsis-prep1.lists.cpsr.org>
>List-Unsubscribe: <https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/wsis-prep1>,
> <mailto:wsis-prep1-request@lists.cpsr.org?subject=3Dunsubscribe>
>List-Archive: <https://ssl.cpsr.org/pipermail/wsis-prep1/>
>Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2003 04:05:20 -0800 (PST)
>
>Notes on PrepCom Plenary February 28, 2003
>By Rik Panganiban, WFM
>
>[Note: These notes do not include every intervention
>by government representatives, but only aim to capture
>the main issues under discussion. Please make
>reference to the documents referenced which are
>available on the official website
>http://www.itu.org/wsis. The note-taker apologizes for
>any errors and appreciates if any corrections and
>additions could be sent to <rikomatic@yahoo.com>]
>
>Chair asks several participants to make statements.
>
>Morocco
>Announces September 2003, Rabat, meeting of
>Francophonie.
>
>ILO
>We welcomes draft declaration. emp on pov red and
>social justice. balance content and cult div and
>delivery systems, freedom and security, and
>applications. The ILO invites assembly to consider
>links of ICTs to poverty. Emph impo of incl proposals
>on employment. Modernization of enterprises in all
>sectors. Svcs for small enterprises. Worker bear the
>brunt of tech change. Changing and education in all
>fields, and basic labor standards should not be
>forgotten.
> Invites govts to include civil society in their
>delegations.
>
>Morocco
>Civil society produced declaration from Marrakesh. An
>Information Society of the 21st Century.=A0
>
>CCBI, Hasan
>CCBI, all stakeholders should be working from today
>forward to build the IS. Business community
>commitment thru investments and public-private
>partnerships.=A0
>
>
>Report of Subcommittee II
>Chair of Subcommittee II reads report of Subcommittee
>II (PC-2/DT/5(Rev.1))
>
>Secretariat
>The bureau met yesterday and propose for inclusion in
>the report before paragraph V:
>
>"It was agreed that inputs from observers would be
>reflected in a seperate section of the revised
>document with a distinct title on the understanding
>that the proposals by governments would constitute the
>basis of negotiations."
>
>Lesotho
>I suggest it would draft better if it goes at end of
>para 5. "Furthermore we agree..."
>
>South Africa
>The point that India was making that if you are
>sitting in one kind of session, you cannot amend the
>report of another kind of meeting. The plenary can
>not change report of Subcommittee II, but it can
>respond to the report. We can take a decision as
>plenary.
>
>Lebanon
>We congratulate bureau on formulation.
>
>India
>We agree with South Africa. SCII is over. This
>should be adopted by the plenary.
>
>Pakistan
>We are not clear on status of report of Subcomittee
>II. Did it adopt any report, did it report it to
>plenary. The draft report of plenary goes to plenary
>with square brackets? Then we make remarks in
>plenary?
>
>Japan Chair
>The report of Subcommittee II is with square brackets.
> Now in plenary, you are going to adopt report with
>amendment you are making today. Square bracket
>deleted and additional phrases that secretariat read.
>With some amendments you are adopting the report.
>
>Chair
>We can suspend plenary, resume Subcommittee II and
>adopt the report without brackets, then go back into
>plenary. Or can plenary make this adoption?=A0
>
>Greece
>I don=EDt think we should go through rigorous
>procedures. Have a seperate decision on what was read
>out by secretariat. We can adopt this in plenary.
>The amendment of the Subcommittee II can happen later.
>
>Chair
>We move to adoption of the amendment. Proposal by the
>bureau. Any objections?
>
>Lesotho
>There are two issues. Whatever decision we take, we
>have to remove brackets from sub para c for reasons
>India advanced. The C is a factual reporting on what
>Working Group reccomended to subcommittee. As regards
>5, what chairman of Subcommittee II read in plenary is
>different from what is in text. Plenary is going to
>accept a report of Subcommittee II which is
>incomplete.
>
>Pakistan
>The report of Subcommittee due to lack of consensus
>was in square brackets and then referred to bureau.
>We are open to accepting your procedure in order to
>save time.
>
>ITU
>In case of the ITU, the Secretary General gives the
>legal advice. I am proposing that the report of
>Subcommittee II is finished. The report came to us
>clearly with square brackets. You can not change that
>fact. You have the discussion right now and you are
>going to make substantial amendments to the report of
>Subcommittee II. Your amendments are your own
>decision in plenary. You are not changing the result
>of subcommittee II. This is your decision in plenary.
> You don=EDt have to hold Subcommittee II again. The
>amendment you are making will be effected as you
>decide. Those amendments will be carried out by the
>chairman of working group when she makes the final
>document. She has to follow the decision of plenary.
>There is no need for further discussion. Just adopt
>the phrase suggested by secretariat. That is my
>advice to you.
>
>India
>Regarding report of Subcommittee II, we remove all
>brackets, and at the end of 5, we add "one line saying
>that with regard to 4C above, the matter was referred
>to the bureau for a decision." Then we can adopt the
>paragraph of the sec and that can be part of our
>report of Prepcom II.
>
>Algeria
>We will go along with any consensus on this. We
>already took a bad decision yesterday when we
>negotiated on this working group report. The
>Preparatory Committee is sovereign. In the work of
>the working group we were not able to get full
>agreement. This report should reflect that. From a
>legal point of a view, a report is a report.
>
>Chair
>The Plenary is sovereign.
>
>Saudi Arabia
>I agree with proposal of ITU Secretary General.
>
>Mongolia
>We have difficulty to accept proposal by bureau. We
>have heard many countries, the majority, who are in
>favor of principle of inclusiveness. The observers
>should be given right to participate and make their
>views known.=A0
>
>Chile
>We agree on sovereign competence of this assembly.
>Contributions of civil society and private sector
>should be on equal footing. So we are in favor of
>including square brackets.
>
>Pakistan
>We agree with the opinion of the Secretary General.
>Plenary is a superior body; it can advise the
>Subcommittee to make changes to report. We would go
>along with the suggestion that Subcommittee II=EDs
>report was as it was yesterday, and plenary made
>decision to remove square brackets and add principle
>of inclusiveness.
>
>Iran
>We fully support what you said. This plenary has right
>to amend whatever it deems advisable. Other reports in
>other meetings are only validated in this plenary.
>Can adopt report as orally amended by this plenary.
>Accept by acclamation. [applause]
>
>Chair
>So decided. Report of prepcom Subcommittee II adopted
>with amendments by the plenary. The secretariat will
>take note of sovereign act of plenary and make changes
>accordingly.
>
>
>Intersessional Mechanisms
>Secretariat read out Document PC-2/DT/6-E on
>Intersessional Mechanisms. He noted that they should
>change "informal" to "formal." Secretariat to develop
>a "roadmap" to prepare for Geneva Summit.
>
>Estonia
>On point 1 and 5. Change to "documents."
>
>Venezuela
>Para 6. How much in advance will we receive the
>documents?
>
>Chair
>This is covered in the regulations of the rules of
>procedure. You will have it in good time.
>
>Chile
>Point 2. Revised: The President should supervise this
>process. We don=EDt agree that we revise the basic
>working document. The basic working document should
>come in as it is and contributions come in as they
>stand.=A0
> Point 5. We don=EDt understand that there will be a new
>document. We have DT/2 and DT/3. And those are the
>documents we will be looking at.
>
>Chair
>The logic of having intersessional work is that we
>move forward from today. So in July we will move
>forward. So we need to take the work that we have
>done now and work forward. In July we will have a new
>working document that we will use at the meeting.
>
>El Salvador
>Point of order. Suspend for 30 minutes to allow some
>informal negotiations that are going on at present.
>
>Greece
>What is the Chile proposal? If we suspend, let=EDs know
>what they proposal is so we don=EDt waste our time.
>
>Chile
>Our proposal will be handed into the coordination of
>GRULAC.=A0
>
>United States
>We support request for brief suspension of meeting.
>All regional groups should have brief opportunity to
>coordinate among themselves and with other regional
>groups.
>
>Chair
>We should break until 3pm. This will give regions
>possibility to consult. Not just a matter of
>discussion within regions but among regions.=A0
>
>Cuba
>Bureau met before regional groups had opportunity to
>meet. Should be open to any government delegation to
>participate in the informal consultation.
>
>Greece
>Members of EU should meet after suspension in Room 17
>to consult and available to meet with other groups.
>
>[break until 6:23pm]
>
>Chair
>You have a document [proposal on intersessional
>period] which represents a consensus of the bureau,
>which represents you. I put this before you for
>approval.
>
>China
>Para 3 and 4. About mandate of bureau. It is not
>mandate of bureau to refine text. I would like to
>delete 3 and 4.=A0
> Have all governments and CS put their documents on
>the website, so we can be transparent.
>
>Chair
>All of us want to be efficient. If we put in place an
>inter-sessional mechanism, than we need to have a
>document that moves us forward. The bureau is the
>structure to do this work. When we say based on this
>membership, we don=EDt mean ONLY the bureau. We could
>bring in others from the regions to fill in gaps.
> If you want we could put on the website all the
>comments that come in.=A0
> It is vital that we not lose all this time between
>now and July. We hope that you can understand that and
>we appreciate your flexibility.
>
>Egypt
>Para 3 does not say the bureau, it says an
>intersessional mechanism based on the bureau. The
>bureau will have the ability to call upon other
>delegations to join them.
> What is meant by "refine further" the documents? I
>would suggest a clarification of this, in a footnote.
> On Para 5, we are having a June meeting of Arab
>states that we want to be inputted into the July
>meeting. That we hope will be the case.
>
>Chair
>Obviously that must be taken into account.
> On "refine" I think the text is fairly explicit. We
>want a document that will be an improvement over the
>current state of the document.
>
>Cuba
>Footnote or a statement or your word to make it clear
>that the remit of this group would not include a
>negotiating mandate. No aspect could be included or
>excluded even if it is part of positions that had been
>taken. We would leave any decision on final deletions
>until July.
> If you are going to improve the document, refine the
>document, without eliminating ideas or concepts, than
>we would have full trust in you to carry out this
>process. We just want to make sure there will be no
>deletions during this process.
>
>Chair
>We have to improve what we have done. We should avoid
>repeating, redundancies. We must reduce. You are
>right when you question the degree of transparency.
>We will be transparent about why we are making certain
>changes. I would never commit myself to something
>where my morality is called into question. You have
>my trust.
>
>Iran
>I would ask that you would not categorize Cuba and
>China interventions as a matter of trust. We trust
>you and bureau. An open-ended intergovernmental body.
> We don=EDt know the reason for para 3.
>
>South Africa
>Many colleagues are not yet ready to speak with their
>heads of state, nor are we. The basic concern is that
>the bureau does not have the mandate to do what this
>document asks them to do. This prepcom can empower
>the bureau to do this work. The other alternative, it
>to give a broad interpretation of rule 14, which gives
>the mandate of the bureau. If we interpret
>"coordination of its work" to mean "advancing the work
>of the prepcom between prepcoms" then they can proceed
>as defined in this document.
>
>Switzerland
>We agree to this compromise. We worry about the
>outcome of the heart of this summit in December. We
>are not too happy about the text as we have it. But
>we think in the next two weeks it can be streamlined.
> The worst thing would be that we are sitting five
>days in Paris and we are still talking about this and
>that and we are not really advancing. We have to go
>in the direction of negotiation. We need a text which
>is much more negotiable than we have now.
>
>Barbados
>We endorse the proposal here.
>
>Chair
>I propose to you this text and hope it is acceptable.
>I propose Number 6 of report is adopted through the
>document that is here.
>
>
>Arrangements for Prepcom III
>
>Secretariat
>Prepcom plenary to agree on dates for Prepcom III.
>September 15 to 26, 2003. Geneva, CICG.
>
>Chair
>It is agreed.
>
>Adoption of Report of Prepcom II
>
>Secretary
>Part V.25.v. Allow rapporteur to rephrase this
>paragraph.
> Suggest we add after point V "VI. Intersessional
>Mechanisms" to summarise the discussion we are going
>to have in a few minutes on this issue.
>I submit this text for your approval.
>
>Lebanon
>We support proposal by secretary. Please mention 30
>bureau members by delegation.
>
>Rapporteur
>If we did this, if we mention this, it should be clear
>that this does not form a precedent for future
>meetings.
>
>Palau
>We wanted a large presence of countries of each region
>because of size and diversity of Asian region. This
>should be reflected in the report.
>
>Chair
>We don=EDt mention any countries in the report.
>
>Lesotho
>Para 20. Why are some names in italics?
>We should conclude with what Prepcom did with
>Subcommittee II report.=A0
>
>Lebanon
>We should bring out the number of countries that have
>participated from each region. I.e. "This group was
>comprise of....." For information=EDs sake. I don=EDt
>mean anything else by this.
>
>Peru
>What will be annexed to this report?
>
>Saudi Arabia
>What would be destiny of brackets on page 1 and 2.
>
>Rapporteur
>We remove those brackets.
>
>Chair
>This report has been adopted.
>
>Other Business
>
>Secretary General ITU
>Core of Summit December 10-12. Will adopt principles
>and action plan. Statements by heads of delegations
>in plenary of summit.=A0
> We are thinking of having during summit a limited
>number of roundtable discussions among heads of state
>and other stakeholders. Primary organization of
>summit rests with secretariat. We are also proposing a
>number of side events be organized, directly related
>to the WSIS. Several UN agencies like ITU and UNESCO
>are planning those side events. We expect a number of
>parallel events to be held by those who wish to
>organize them, prior to and during the summit. They
>will be organized by organizations and groups
>independent of UN and the summit itself.
> For both side and parallel events, rooms will be
>provided by host country within its financial limits.
>Executive secretariat, Swiss government and Canton of
>Geneva. We would like to organize with the Swiss
>government guidelines for organizing side events.
> Information regarding those events will be posted on
>website as soon as we have got this information. I
>strongly invite you all to participate extensively
>both in the core summit but also the other numerous
>events that will be organized alongside the summit
>itself.
>
>Switzerland
>One of conditions for success of this summit is the
>political content. The other thing will be the
>parallel events. These will be events dealing with
>different subjects -- health, ICT and development,
>media event. There will be various subjects on best
>practice, etc.=A0
>
>Chair
>We have adopted this report. Extend our thanks to our
>interpreters. Without them we would not have achieved
>this consensus.
>
>[applause ]
>
>=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>RIK PANGANIBAN rikomatic@yahoo.com
>Mobile number (Switzerland): +41 764 733 274
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
>http://taxes.yahoo.com/
>_____________________________
>Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) is the oldest
>non-profit, mass membership organization
>working on social impacts of computer technology.
>
>To learn more, go to http://www.cpsr.org
>
>To join, use http://cpsr.org/membership
>_____________________________
>wsis-prep1 mailing list
>wsis-prep1@lists.cpsr.org
>https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/wsis-prep1
--