[CCWG-ACCT] [community-finance] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update

Schaefer, Brett Brett.Schaefer at heritage.org
Tue Aug 16 18:10:13 UTC 2016


Marilyn,

ICANN reports the lobbying information as required by US law, but that does not encompass the education/engagement efforts that often border on lobbying. Nor do US lobbying laws require disclosure of expenses for similar activities elsewhere. I do not know what laws apply in other countries, but it seems unreasonable to expect the community to endeavor to find that information in dozens of countries when ICANN could readily provide it.

Also, it is troubling that the confidentiality clauses in ICANN contracts might serve as a loophole for transparency. Specifically, I expect they would block disclosure under the DIDP process. Would they also would prevent an individual Board Member or Decisional Participant from obtaining this information if they requested it under their Right of Inspection? Or impede the EC from obtaining the information through an independent audit?

IMO, these are important questions that should be answered and resolved.

Best,

Brett


________________________________
Brett Schaefer
Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs
Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy
The Heritage Foundation
214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE
Washington, DC 20002
202-608-6097
heritage.org<http://heritage.org/>
From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Marilyn Cade
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2016 1:50 PM
To: Sam Lanfranco; accountability-cross-community at icann.org
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [community-finance] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update

First of all, ICANN has always complied with the lobbying disclosures. :-)
I know that some are turning up their noses at the use of lobbyists, but this is not a bad thing when one understands that in order to meet with elected officials and provide information, depending on how much of that one does, one registers as a lobbyist in the United States.

I am not now a lobbyist, but at one time in my technical career which spaned 27 years, I was registered, because the majority of my job was to meet with elected officials -- in the USG, in the US Congress and in the US House of Representatives.  And my job was to talk about the Internet, to explain it, and to explain its benefits.  In those few years that I was in that role, each year, I disclosed all of the relevant information, as did my employer.

From what I see, ICANN does the same.

It is also acceptable for an organization to augment its staff with experts that are needed for only a short time period that are experts in communications, or in policy analysis, or in software redesign, or in Security, etc. etc.

I too wonder what the right degree of transparency is, but I suspect it is pretty close to where we are now, with a few tweaks.

And for anyone who wants to spend the time that I do every year on the ICANN budget, and make a positive contribution on that front, please, please, join me and Chuck Gomes, and Jimson Olufuye and many others, such as the ccTLDs and instead of complaining about lack of transparency, read the detailed reports that we do have access to, and attend the working sessions of the community on the ICANN budget.

Marilyn Cade


________________________________
To: accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
From: sam at lanfranco.net<mailto:sam at lanfranco.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 12:52:40 -0400
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [community-finance] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update

More thoughts on:

On 16-Aug-16 12:22, parminder wrote:

I ask you; do you agree or not that ICANN should uphold these transparency standards that are upheld by public bodies?

There are two complementary avenues for pursuing what should be ICANN’s commitment to transparency, and discussion should proceed on both fronts.

One is try to distill a scope and depth of transparency from ICANN’s mission and vision. That includes considerations of what concepts like “in the public good”, “in the public interest” and “public governance” direct us (the multistakeholder community within ICANN) to consider in the establishment of a standard of transparency to which ICANN should aspire.

The other avenue is to identify concrete and existing examples of a lack of transparency within the current operations of ICANN (e.g. lobbying contracts, “service” contracts, etc.) and build a remedial framework of transparency practice within ICANN.

Discussion should proceed on both fronts.

Sam L.


_______________________________________________ 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<https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160816/bb1bdb2c/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list