[CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Plenary-20180624-Agenda and material

[Michael Karanicolas]

Hi all,

Thanks very much for circulating. I am of the opinion that the
proposed implementation guidance for open contracting and government
engagement would severely undercut the substance of these two
recommendations. While I am mindful of the need to secure Board
support, there is little point in doing so if our efforts to do so
nullify the potential of the Recommendations to have any sort of
meaningful impact.

Regarding open contracting, the proposed language sets an incredibly
weak standard of implementation, such that it robs the recommendation
of its practical value in terms of accountability over ICANN’s
spending. It would be the weakest open contracting system that I am
aware of by a wide margin, and only a slight improvement on ICANN’s
current practice. I leave it to the community to determine whether
there is, indeed, a need to develop meaningful accountability over
ICANN’s spending. But if such a need exists, it will not be addressed
by the current language.

I would suggest setting the threshold at $100,000, which I feel is an
appropriate compromise position, given ICANN's situation and status.
This is an order of magnitude higher than governmental contracting
systems, which typically disclose anything over $10,000. However, it
is in line with the practice at comparable international institutions
like the World Bank. In the alternative, and given that there is
apprehension of the impacts of transparency in the contracting
process, I would suggest that the amount of $500,000 be kept, but that
the implementation guidance make clear that the current system should
be viewed as a starting point, with a general goal of improving
transparency in the system over time.

Regarding the implementation guidance on government engagement, I
start by noting that the reference to the DIDP exception for
international relations is inappropriate, given that the
recommendation does not call for disclosure of the substance of
materials provided to governments beyond their general theme. The
inclusion of the DIDP reference is harmful as it could be read as an
expansion of the DIDP exception to include such incidental information
as the identities of ICANN staffers engaged in governmental outreach
and the amounts of expenditures related to their work. In other words,
this language is not only inappropriate in this context, but could
open the door to a significant regression in ICANN’s DIDP system,
which is counter to what we are meant to be achieving. Given that this
entire passage is unnecessary to the substance of the implementation
guidance, I would recommend that it be deleted.

In terms of the substance of the implementation guidance, I have
suggested that, while it’s reasonable to exempt conferences and
training programs, which would tend to be outside the scope of the
activities this recommendation targets, extending that exclusion to
meetings is problematic since this is the form that most lobbying
takes. Virtually all engagement or outreach includes “meetings” of
some kind. As a result, the impact of the current language would be to
provide no accountability or transparency for any lobbying or
political activities so long as the substance of the work is either
publicly available or part of a formally published ICANN position – an
enormous loophole. It’s also worth noting that the recommendation in
no way prohibits ICANN from engaging in political or lobbying
activities, it merely requires transparency around these activities if
more that $20,000 is spent on them.

I look forward to discussing this further on Sunday.

Best regards,

Michael Karanicolas

On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 4:56 AM, Bernard Turcotte
<turcotte.bernard at gmail.com> wrote:
> All,
>
> Please find below the agenda for the WS2 Panama Face to Face meeting
> scheduled for Sunday 24 June.
>
> Schedule for the CCWG-Accountability-WS2 Plenary – Panama City – Sunday 24
> June 2018 08:30 Local (13:30 UTC)
>
>
> Room: Salon 1-3
> (GAC)<https://62.schedule.icann.org/floor_maps/2821?per_page=30&with%5bfloor_map_id%5d=2821>
>
>
>
> 1.     8:30 – 9:00 (13:30 – 14:00 UTC)
>
> 1.1. Coffee
>
> 1.2. Review of Agenda
>
> 1.3. Introduction, update to SOIs, reminder on standards of behavior
>
> 1.4. Administration
>
> 2.     9:00 – 10:30 (14:00 – 15:30 UTC)
>
> 2.1. Current status
>
> 2.2. Review and confirmation of Implementation Guidance
>
> 3.     10:30 – 11:00 (15:30 – 16:00 UTC)
>
> 3.1. Coffee break
>
> 4.     11:00 – 12:00 (16:00 – 17:00 UTC)
>
> 4.1. Path Forward
>
> 4.2. Official thanks
>
> 4.3. AOB
>
> 4.3.1.    IOT Public Consultation Announcement
>
> 4.4. Adjournment
>
> 5.     12:00 – 13:00 (17:00 – 18:00 UTC)
>
> 5.1. Lunch
>
> Please note that 3 of the 4 elements to be discussed under Implementation
> Guidance are detailed in the attached document.
>
> We hope to have Implementation Guidance on the fourth element in time for
> the plenary to discuss on Sunday.
>
> Remote participation - https://community.icann.org/x/ZCwFBQ
> Bernard Turcotte
> ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
>
> for the Co-Chairs
>
> Thomas, Jordan and Tijani
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>