[CCWG-ACCT] Contribution on Transparency Reforms for CCWG / Budget veto/ Financial reporting

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

My regret is that if ICANN the Corporation had implemented all of the
transparency related  recommendations that came out of ATRT, we might
not be having this tussle right now.

avri


On 29-Oct-15 14:44, Chris Disspain wrote:
> Not sure that’s a fair characterisation, Nigel. Speaking personally, I
> have been crystal clear that one of my major concerns with the
> membership model was the statutory rights.
>
> I see the current draft from a small group re ‘transparency’ as a
> severe case of ‘mission creep’ as outlined by Greg. It’s ironic that
> many of those with the loudest voices of concern re ICANN’s alleged
> propensity to mission creep are now doing precisely that. It serves to
> underline the point I have consistently made about the need for
> community accountability along with Board/staff accountability. 
>
> auDA's acceptance of the designator model is based on the premise that
> the only power of the designator is to be the legal entity that has
> standing to go to arbitration and if necessary to court. 
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Chris Disspain| Chief Executive Officer
>
> .au Domain Administration Ltd
>
> T: +61 3 8341 4111 | F: +61 3 8341 4112
>
> E: ceo at auda.org.au <mailto:ceo at auda.org.au> | W:www.auda.org.au
> <http://www.auda.org.au/> 
>
> auDA – Australia’s Domain Name Administrator
>
>
> *Important Notice****- *This email may contain information which is
> confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for
> the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended
> recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email.
> If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender
> and delete this message immediately. Please consider the environment
> before printing this email.
>
>
>> On 30 Oct 2015, at 05:25 , Nigel Roberts <nigel at channelisles.net
>> <mailto:nigel at channelisles.net>> wrote:
>>
>> If the proposed new "designator" accountability model is to have the
>> same credibility as the Membership model originally proposed by the
>> CCWG, it must have no less power in relation to financial
>> transparency than members would have statutorily.
>>
>> (Otherwise, the reasons for the perceived strong objection from ICANN
>> to a membership model probably becomes crystal clear . . . )
>>
>>
>> Nigel Roberts
>>
>> On 29/10/15 18:13, Phil Buckingham wrote:
>>> Hi Bruce, Fellow Board Members, Fadi, Co Chairs,
>>>
>>> As a fellow CFO, I think Xavier, under Fadi's leadership, has made
>>> huge strides in ICANN's financial reporting and its underlying
>>> financial processes.
>>> However I agree with you,Bruce that there is still a long long way
>>> to go.
>>>
>>> Dare I mention $60M gTLD auction proceeds and the $89.3 M "remaining
>>> balance" re new GTLDs  as per the FY16 Operating Plan & Budget.
>>> Added to the fact, actual new gTLD registrations are 50% below budget .
>>> This concerns me enormously , particularly regarding the budget veto
>>> issue.
>>> Following the subgroup meeting in Dublin (that included Cherine,
>>> Asha, Xavier, Jonathan Z, Ray  and myself ) Xavier has been tasked
>>> with building up the non discretionary / discretionary budgetary
>>>  expenditure escalation  ladder re the budget veto. This is a hugely
>>> complex task.
>>> Could we take this offline to discuss for me, working at ICANN, to
>>> shadow / work with Xavier as an independent on behalf of the CCWG
>>> Accountability.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Phil
>>>
>>> Phil Buckingham
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>
>>> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf
>>> Of Bruce Tonkin
>>> Sent: 29 October 2015 12:17
>>> To: accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Contribution on Transparency Reforms for CCWG
>>>
>>> Hello Greg,
>>>
>>>>>  6333.  The accounting books and records and minutes of proceedings
>>> of the members and the board and committees of the board shall be
>>> open to inspection upon the written demand on the corporation of any
>>> member at any reasonable time, for a purpose reasonably related to
>>> such person's interests as a member.
>>>
>>> The minutes are basically published today.    The only minutes
>>> apparently that are not posted are compensation committee minutes –
>>> but even then we could at least note the items discussed without
>>> necessarily disclosing some personal information.
>>>
>>> With regard to financials– we are already moving towards the same
>>> standards as publicly listed companies in the USA.   We now provide
>>> quarterly financial reporting, and a quarterly call where the
>>> community can question the CEO and the CFO on the income and
>>> expenditure.   It would not be normal to provide people with access
>>> to the raw accounting system (in this case Great Plains) – which
>>> would include information on payments to all staff etc.
>>>
>>> We do use an external auditor to validate our financials and
>>> processes once per year.
>>>
>>> If there is a community  concern about a particular financial matter
>>> (e.g concern about whether procurement policies were being followed)
>>> – then I think it would be more appropriate if the single legal
>>> entity that represents the community powers has the right to appoint
>>> an external auditor to validate any particular process or numbers
>>> and report back to the community.      Audit firms have the
>>> appropriate skills to analyse financial accounting records and also
>>> have appropriate procedures in place for confidentiality.
>>>
>>> I think we should be focussing on improving the processes we already
>>> have.   I advocated moving to quarterly financial reporting, and I
>>> have certainly been a strong advocate of making things as public as
>>> possible, and welcome suggestions for improving our processes.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Bruce Tonkin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus