Welcome to the United Nations | Department of Economic and Social Affairs

Geneva - Switzerland
Multistakeholder Advisory Group Meeting
24 February 2011
Morning Session
10:00 a.m.

***
The following is the output of the real-time captioning taken during the IGF MAG Meeting, in Geneva. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid to understanding the proceedings at the session, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
***
[ Gavel ]

>>VINCENZO AQUARO:   Good morning, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, colleagues.
Today is the informal MAG meeting.  It is the first MAG meeting in the second cycle of IGF.
We will use the same formula of the open consultation of yesterday.  So we will have, as moderator, Madam Chair Alice Munyua and also GAC Secretariat to support the MAG.
This meeting is open for the observers, but what is important is that we work to the agenda.  We invited the observer to be part of this MAG, but it's important that the MAG works on this program.
We have a very tight agenda, and the program is with a lot of items, so we don't have the second day to finalize so it's really important that we work straight on this.
I give the floor now to the Secretariat, Chengetai, please.

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Thank you very much.
For today, we're going to be working with the program paper that Avri managed to update last night.  And for the members of the MAG, I have sent it throughout the mailing list, and for the observers, if you want to download it, it's on the front page of our Web site.
There's the link to it.
We will just work through the program paper, because this program paper is -- will act as a rolling document, so as we go along, we'll improve it, step by step.
, I think, it lists basically everything that we need to discuss for the planning of the meeting.
And then after that, we will -- if we have time, we will discuss the next steps in the preparation.  Okay.  Thank you.  I'll just give it to Alice now to start.
Oh, sorry.  One more thing.  MAG members, please, if you could, sit in the center, and observers can sit on the sides, just so that we know who is who and there's no confusion.
Thank you.

>> I just wondered what the status is of the chair's advisors as there is no chair, as there is no formal chair?

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Since there is no chair, there is no advisors to the chair.
So it's only MAG members, not -- no advisors to the chair.
At the moment, they are observers.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Well, thank you very much, and good morning to everybody.  Thank you very much for yesterday's very productive and very dynamic discussions.
We'll go straight to the agenda.  And we're looking at ensuring that we come out of the meeting with having identified a general theme, having identified subthemes, having agreed and discussed the program outline workshops, meeting types and structure, remote moderation and how that's going to work, and then a little bit around resource persons and logistics as well as hubs, if we have time.
So I would like us to go straight to looking or agreeing or coming up with a general theme.
As you can see, I think around 11 of them.  There were 11 suggestions, or so, yesterday on governance of the people's Internet.  Yeah, they are up there.  Developing base principles for governance of a people-centered Internet.  Then creating a development agenda for Internet governance.  Role of Internet governance in building participative and inclusive democratization.  Internet governance for Internet continuity.  Internet governance for access.  Internet governance and human rights, principles, development and progress in Internet governance.  Governance of the mobile Internet.  Internet governance from a youth perspective:  skills, social networks and development.  And Internet as a driver of change, development, democratization, freedom and access.
So we do need to come up with one general, one main theme.
I think I would like to open the floor for discussions around this, if you could come up with one general theme, please.
Any comments, suggestions?
UNESCO, yeah.

>>UNESCO:   Good morning, my name is Cedric (saying name).  
I would like to support the last of the bullet points here as an overall theme.  I think the Internet as driver of change, development, democratization, freedom and access combines many of the dimensions we have discussed yesterday, and it reflects a good part of the history, and also some of the future discussions.
So I would like to support the last bullet point which combines well the different aspects.
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.
Any other comments on that?
Waudo.

>>WAUDO SIGANGA:  Thank you, Madam Chair.
I think I would like to suggest that as we try to develop an overall theme, I think it's important also to take into consideration that that theme should reflect aspirations of all the stakeholders.  I'm particularly thinking about the business or the private sector stakeholder group.
The business people that I have interacted with would like some help to understand the relevance of the IGF to their challenges.  And Madam Chair, as you mentioned yesterday in your opening comments, you identified the importance of having discussions that participants find relevant to their challenges.  And these participants also include the business community.
So I think as we come up with a general theme, it's very important to make sure that that general theme flows across all the stakeholders, and it is important and relevant for all the stakeholders.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   What do you think about the suggestion Internet -- the last bullet as suggested by UNESCO?

>>WAUDO SIGANGA:  Well, it -- First of all, just mentioning the principle that I think we should look at.  I have to look at that particular one, and then maybe I will give you a proper answer.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:  Any other comments from MAG members?
Fouad.

>>FOUAD BAJWA:   Thank you, Alice.
I think we can revisit the main theme of Internet governance for development for Vilnius, because if you look at the bullets, these are development issues which have been brought off and on, but have not actually received a certain main subject or main heading under which they go forward.
So I think this could be the starting point, if we had the possibility of exploring Internet governance for development to include all these under the heading.  Well, again, it goes on to, as my colleague just shared it, goes on to consensus of all stakeholders, whether this would be an appropriate approach.
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.
Ayesha.

>>AYESHA HASSAN:   Thank you, Madam Chair.  Since a few of us in the ICC/BASIS team had put forward the last bullet, I think I would try to elaborate a little bit on why I think that responds to a lot of the priorities in setting an overall theme.
Just by comparison, I would say governance of the mobile Internet is sort of focusing everything, then, on one form of technology.  And when we look at -- I guess it's bullet five, Internet governance for access, in a way is it just only about access this year?
And I would also say that part of the reason, as I described yesterday, that we were trying -- and I'm not wedded to this.  I'm happy to see it change.  I just was trying to find an umbrella that would be helpful in terms of marketing the IGF in Kenya.  And if you look at that last bullet, modify some words, maybe the four sub-bullet words could be modified if people feel they are not covering everything, but it's also an attempt to say to a very broad public, your interests and priorities are going to be discussed here.
And so trying to find something that would really bring everyone in, building on what Waudo said, not only business but civil society and governments and IGOs and various organizations should see some reason why they should be there.
And again, we are looking at the Internet as an element -- an element in the social, economic, political lives of people that is changing lives.
So that was part of the reason to put in the word "change."  And "driver" was just to show that there was some action, something is active.
Anyway, it's more to say the IGF in Kenya will need a banner, and it needs to be a banner that responds to everybody.  And it's interesting.
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you, Ayesha.
Yeah, India, and then Valeria.

>>INDIA:   Thank you, Madam Chair.  Given the permission that we could consider something new, I just had this proposal that could we say governance for Internet of things?  Because it would therefore cover aspects of Internet in health, education, and the future devices and the future of the world all together.
So this is just a suggestion, governance for Internet of things.
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.
Valeria.

>>VALERIA BETANCOURT:   Thank you, Madam Chair.
Along the same lines that UNESCO representative presented, I would like to express my support for the last bullet, the last proposal on Internet as a driver of change.
However, I would suggest that we remove the word "freedom" as if have -- if we secure development, democratization and access, it will drive us to freedoms, to secure freedoms, and another type of elements that are really important for people's life as participation.
So I would be very happy to see if we have just development, democratization and access in the sentence.  
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you, Valeria.
Any other comments?
Waudo.

>>WAUDO SIGANGA:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  I think I would like to put my support also to what my colleague from the ICC/BASIS has said about bullet number 11.  It looks more in the  that I am thinking.
However, I think we're having an overall theme, I don't think we need to be so specific.  We need something a little bit more generalized.  And I would have left it at the word "change."  I would have said Internet as the driver of change.  Perhaps I would have just tried to talk about what kind of change, maybe positive change.  But just Internet as a driver of change, rather than introducing -- There are some words that I think maybe -- may not flow across stakeholder groups, like democratization, freedom.  They could bring a little bit of confusion in my view from a business perspective.
Development sounds okay, but I would rather if we just had a short overall theme of Internet as a driver of change.  Maybe play around with the word "change."  Maybe positive change or something of that kind.
Maybe you could have it number 13, Internet as a driver of change.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Okay.  Thank you.
Any other comments?
It seems there is quite a lot of support for the last one, Internet as a driver of change, development, democratization, the idea to strike out "freedom" and leave it as development, democratization and access.  And then the new suggestion to have just Internet as a driver of change.
Is it possible to hear comments on that?  Thank you.  Michael.

>>MICHAEL KATUNDU:   Good morning, and thank you, Madam Chair.
Item 13 is a positive agenda item, but I would just like to throw a spanner into the works and ask when we are talking about driver of change, is it positive change from a development perspective?  Or we are looking just at negative change?  I think we need to be careful because we know development can be used for the good or the bad.
So if we are comfortable with the agenda, we need to make sure we send the right message out there so those who are coming up with the relevant workshops and so forth, they do not digress so much.  Because basically, the Internet we are talking about here is a development aspect of the Internet.
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you, Michael.
Can we delete the other bullets that haven't actually gotten any support so we are left with the items that are getting support and we can deal with those?  Is that okay?  May I suggest?
So we are left with just 11 and 13, and a new 13.
Fouad.

>>FOUAD BAJWA:   Can we keep the bullets like just separately so at least we can revisit them?
And while we look at the suggestions and as Michael had shared, there is a certain level of confusion for new participants within the IGF process and for the various stakeholders.
So I think that if we tend to at least include, like after the colon we have development, democratization and access, we should actually have those key words to define what we mean by Internet as a driver of change.  Because Internet as a driver of change has been presented and perceived in various ways, perceptions.  And right now what we are seeing, one side of the board thinks Internet for change means the changes we are seeing in the Middle East, and then one side of it, of the board thinks that, okay, we can look at it from the perspective of development.
So we have to be very careful when we're trying to give this phrase as an overall theme.  We should not lose the key words that we have -- the information that we received from yesterday's consultations.
And development, democratization and access should be included within the theme.
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.
Nurani.

>>NURANI NIMPUNO:   Thank you, Madam Chair, Alice.
I think -- I really like the wording of Internet as driver of change.  I think it puts Internet in the driver's seat.  It's not Internet and something else, Internet in relation to something else, but actually Internet as a tool, as the driver, as what pushes for change.
I think keeping it at that is maybe a bit too broad.  I think there was enough feedback yesterday in the open consultation to include elements of democratization, freedom of expression, access, and certainly development.
It's the overall theme, so we don't want to go in and be too specific and write down too many bullet points, but I quite like development, democratization and access.  I think those things encompasses or includes all the feedback we got in the consultation yesterday.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.
UNESCO.

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Council of Europe first.

>>COUNCIL OF EUROPE:   Thank you, Madam Chair.  I don't have a precise wording, but I think that I like the idea of progress, first of all.  One thing is progress, a driver for progress or of progress.  I mean, changes is what's been said, it can have different connotations.  So I think progress is something which is forward looking and it's something which everyone can share that we are moving forward, progress is being made.  Every time we are making progress, the next billion users, et cetera.
So I like the idea of using the word "progress" somewhere.
And I think that many people can agree upon the word "freedom" somewhere.  Because freedom is something which I think the Internet is bringing everybody, in whichever context.  Freedom -- many of us have more freedom online than we do off-line, even.
So I think freedom is essential in that -- as another word to be kept, to be retained.
Now, I don't have a proposal wording for you, but I'd like to just make those two points.
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.
UNESCO.

>>UNESCO:   I would just second the statement just made.  Freedom of expression, freedom as a freedom and right to information is absolutely essential for many aspects, for democratization but also as a human right.  And we see it in the democratization process, and all the developments we have started to discuss yesterday.  UNESCO will put forward later workshops related to democratization and freedom of expression theme.
So I also think the freedom aspect is quite essential in this.
And if I remember right, ICC yesterday had actually the proposal of Internet as a driver for change, development, democratization -- development, freedom, and access.  So democratization was actually added later.
So I think the development, freedom and access are essential components, and I'm fine in supporting also democratization in there, but it would be difficult to give up the freedom aspect.
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.  We have quite a lot of support for 11 as it is and "freedom" to be left there.
So any other comments on that?
Yes, Ayesha.

>>AYESHA HASSAN:   Thank you.  And UNESCO is right, the word democratization was added.  I don't have a problem with that.
I thought I would just also -- in looking at the priority issues that came up in the discussions yesterday, and especially from the host country, the word "innovation" might also be interesting to consider as a subpoint.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.
Fouad.

>>FOUAD BAJWA:   Thank you.  Supporting just what UNESCO shared and, at the same time, what Ayesha has shared.
The Internet as a driver of change, access, development, democratization, and innovation.
I would bring access as the basic element to this phrase, because without access, the realization of these benefits is not possible at the moment.
So I would start with access, development, democratization, and innovation.
Thank you.

>>AYESHA HASSAN:   Just to come back on that.  I think there has been a little bit of concern about the word democratization.  I personally don't have a problem with it, but we are outlining a specific political approach in a title for an open Internet Governance Forum.  It might actually be better to highlight democratization somewhere else in the program as part of main session issue or what have you, and look at the word freedom and development, access, and innovation as all things that could lead to democratization but we're not making a judgment about a political approach.
Thanks.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you, Ayesha.
Okay.  I would like to wrap it up.  I think from what we have here, we have Internet as a driver of change, access, development, freedom, and innovation.  Striking out democratization.
Any final -- Valeria.

>>VALERIA BETANCOURT:   Thank you, Alice.
I think it might be a little bit complex to include the "innovation" word if we keep the "freedom" word in the sentence.  If we want to appoint any contentious political interpretation, it might also be interpreted as a free market, for instance.
I'm just saying that it avoid (dropped audio) any -- any contentious political interpretation of the sentence.  It might diverge from what is the political message that we want to pass with the original formulation.
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Fouad and then Michael.

>>FOUAD BAJWA:   This is the subject of (inaudible) comes up.  What we see happening, the developments in the Middle East, we saw a two-sided political approach, and one side disrupted the Internet and the other side used the Internet productively for national organization.
So I think if we tend to drop this political aspect within the Internet for change, I think it would be undermining the fact that politics is having a combined effect on all the stakeholders at the moment with regards to the Internet.
So I think if we want to balance it, we have to keep the right words there.  And while at the same time innovation is going to happen only and if the Internet is running; right?
So if you have problems with the continuation of the Internet, it does -- the overall theme does have political aspect to it.  And we cannot undermine that.
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Yeah, I agree.  The whole theme has a political implication to it.
But anyway, Michael and then George and then Chris.

>>MICHAEL KATUNDU:   Thank you, Madam Chair.
I recall there are times we come up with a certain theme or agenda item, and we do not have to overdescribe at the main agenda.  But in the description, we have some of the language kind of description which takes care of a broader aspect of what we really want to achieve.
And I agree that the terms we use here must be terms meant to attract people across all stakeholders.  We should not appear to really use terminologies which might be construed, right from when somebody reads what we are coming up with.
I would suggest that -- I would propose that we stick to access being quite central to us, all along the MAG.  Development as well, so we focus on the development aspects of the Internet.  And innovation.
And then in the description, we can bring out how broad these themes can be able to cut across.  And I believe we are looking at innovation, then innovation is about the tweeting and the Facebook and so forth.  So it would definitely indirectly bring out democratization if it's used positively to communicate and bring out transparency.
Freedom again, when you are looking at access and development of the Internet, you also have to look at the facets of ensuring that there is freedom to communicate, if at all that tool is going to be useful across the citizens and so forth.
So my proposal is we may need to stick to access, development and innovation because we are talking of how to innovate the Internet from end to end, to be able to reap several benefits out of it.
Thank you, chair.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.
George.

>>GEORGE PAPADATOS:   Well, the more I hear, the more I tend to agree with the proposal made by Mr. Siganga to keep Internet as a driver of change.
The reason being that if you list two or three items, I think that gives an indication to whoever wants to take the floor to limit his intervention on these issues.  And frankly, if you look at Internet as a driver of change, you can list about 20 or 30 items that are not included in there that have a specific meeting for several groups.
So the other possibility would be to leave Internet as a driver of change and have a little paragraph that will be descriptive as to what that could encompass.
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you, George.
Chris.

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN:   Good morning, everybody.  A couple of things.
I think the purpose of this theme is to provide a context.  It's to provide the bowl into which we will put the fruit of the individual discussion.  So we have to be very careful to just provide a context.
However, having said that, I think -- I don't agree.  I think if you just say the Internet as a driver of change, that's not enough of a context.  I think we need to provide some guidance, pointers to the sorts of areas that we might be considering.
This is a very delicate political situation.  In the same way that some people here have talked about, you know, the Internet being used politically in the last couple of months in various places around the world, I would hate to see the development of this IGF in Kenya being used to make specific political points in the things that we put together.
Having said all -- So I'm not happy with democratization, for a start.
Having said that, I do think it's necessary to put some stuff in there, and I think my gut feeling is access, development, and innovation on their own are not enough because I think they will be -- that will enable some people to close down discussion, the things that would sit fundamentally under freedom.  So I am in favor of access, development, innovation, and freedom.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Any other comments?  UNESCO.

>>UNESCO:   I will be very brief.  What about putting "innovations" in the very beginning, "Internet innovations," double point, and then we continue?  "Internet innovations," double point, and then we start with access, development, freedom.  It would bring the "innovation" to the front and "driver of change."  It would be clear that the change is positive in terms -- "Internet innovations," double point, then you do "development, freedom and access."

>> Once again, I would have to act as a speed breaker here.  Without access being the basic -- as a starting point, I don't see the aspect of innovation being truly covered because for us from the developing world, access is where we start from.  What forms of access?  That's a later subject.  
But at the moment, I would emphasize to keep "access" there as a basic need to actually connect to the Internet or access the Internet.  So I'm not comfortable with "access" being removed as a first keyword.  Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.  Qusai and then back to Chris.

>> QUSAI AL-SHATTI:  Good morning, Madam Chair.  I think it is important not only to say "access," but also we need to mention somewhere there the right to access, the individual right to access.  This is a key issue.  Access by itself would give the impression that we only want to increase the base of users that's using the Internet.  But we do have an issue right now about the right to access, being just free and so on.  So somewhere in there I would like to see the word "rights" included.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Okay, Chris?

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN:   Just on Qusai's point, yes, but again if you put the word "access" in, then that allows you as you go further drill further down into the content rather than the context of the IGF to include right of access as a topic.
I think it is really important to remember that for most people reading what we are talking about, when they see the agenda for the IGF, they are just going to see words on the page and they are not necessarily -- they won't have had this discussion.
"Innovation" as a word when you see it on the page in the context of the Internet is almost guaranteed to be taken as meaning technical innovation because that's what people will think.  What they won't think is under the heading "innovation" includes changes in a way that territories are governed.  They are not going to think that.  They are going to refer to access is clear, it means access to the Internet and everything that sits underneath that.  
And development and freedom -- I think we just -- we've got some really good words there.  And fiddling around the edges just makes them more opaque rather than the clarity that currently exists.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Bill Graham and then Fouad?  No not anymore Fouad.

>>  Thank you, Chair.  I would like to, once again, bring us back to the word of "democratization" because we see a good amount of support for the word to be there from our colleagues from the Council of Europe, UNESCO, because it is sort of an umbrella keyword.
And lot of the aspects which I already mentioned that, you know, getting the right to access is, again, sort of a political process.  
What has been happening is also -- in the Middle East an example of politics and the struggle for democracy.  So I think that we should not lose the word "democratization."  Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Just a minute.  I think I'd like the Secretariat to make clear about the rule of observers before we move on.

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Yes, sorry.  So for today, the people that can make contributions is the MAG members and IGOs.

>> Why?

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Why?  Because it is a MAG meeting.  It is an informal MAG meeting.  We are following the rules of the MAG.  Open consultations were yesterday.  So we allowed you to come in here in this room... (dropped audio)... just to improve our transparency so you know what's going on.

>> That seems to be a step backwards from the formal rules of procedures that were implemented over the last year or so for the MAG.

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN:   Can I suggest you ask the MAG?  No, I mean, can you suggest -- surely if the people who you have just suggested are allowed to speak and prepared to let everybody speak, then we should let everybody speak, don't you think?

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   I would like to hear what the MAG has to say about that.  It is a bit of a confusing --

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Just an argument for it, of course, the MAG can speak, correct.  The argument for it was just that in the open consultations everybody could speak.  But today we have a very tight agenda, and we really want to decide on these topics quickly.  And the MAG is supposed to be a representative of the wider community.  But, yes, we can have a vote on it.

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN:   Can I ask.  I don't want to get stuck in a debate and argument about this for a very long time.  It strikes me -- and I have no wish to be difficult about this.  But it strikes me that unless you are able to say that the results of this session of the MAG are going to be taken as the input into the IGF in Kenya, as the results of previous MAG sessions have been taken for input into the IGF, then it's not a MAG session.  
My understanding is currently there is no mandate for the MAG.  We are here as a group of people informally.  And I assume that you cannot provide us with a guarantee that what we are doing and saying will actually occur, can you?

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   The results of any of these processes will act as recommendations to the Secretary-General.  So what happens today will still go to New York and act as a recommendation to the Secretary-General.
So we never had a guarantee as such, but we would -- the only guarantee we can give is that the views expressed today will be sent to New York for the Secretary-General's consideration.  Does that make it clear or help in any way?

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Okay.  Can we move on then with, I think, observers are not allowed to speak and only MAG members, even though it is an informal MAG meeting.

>> (inaudible).

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Pardon?  Yes.  Okay, so Chris again.

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN:   Two things.  One, I do want to move on because I want to make a point about what Fouad said.  But, secondly, all I'm suggesting is -- or asking, is there any reason why we can't simply ask the MAG if they have a problem with other people speaking?  If there is a problem, then that's fine.  But if there isn't a problem, then I can't see why it's not possible for other people to speak.  
I just -- I'm personally saying I'm happy for Adam and Bertrand and anybody else who has anything to say to speak.  But I'm asking my colleagues on the MAG whether they feel the same way.

>>GEORGE PAPADATOS:   Hello.  I don't think the MAG has a representative that can speak on behalf of the MAG.  I don't think we have ever done this.  And either we have had majorities making decisions.  So I think at this point it is up to the co-chairs to have a ruling on this issue so that we can go on.  That is what usually happens in similar circumstances.
And I know that there haven't been any written rules of procedure.  But the objective is as you, Madam Chair, said, to agree quickly on the input to get a meeting in Kenya going.  That's the objective.  
Frankly, I don't have a problem with the participation of observers.  If it is a MAG meeting, then I think the main inputs should come from the MAG members.  Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.  Please.
All right.  Well, thank you.  I think we'll carry on with the MAG providing input into this process and then later on we can have observers, if we have time, to input into the process.  So I would like to move on.  
We do need to agree on the general theme.  We seem to have -- to be, you know, all in agreement with "Internet as a driver of change," Number 11.  So I think it's agreeing on refining it or leaving it like that.
So, Chris, Valeria, Heather.

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN:   And Bill Graham, too.  
I just wanted to address the point that Fouad made about democratization because I'm very uncomfortable with that word being in there.  I think the way Fouad described it explains why I am uncomfortable.  
The way he described it was making reference to a specific political event, and that's why I'm uncomfortable.  It is a very, very specific term that is clearly sheeted home to what's been happening in the last couple of months and it makes me very uncomfortable.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Heather?

>>HEATHER DRYDEN:   Thank you very much, Chairwoman.  I just wanted to comment along the lines really the same as what Chris has commented regarding this theme.  I think that the formulation that includes access, development, freedom and possibly innovation is a good formulation and allows us to move forward and to still identify all those subthemes that could easily, readily fall underneath this broader theme.
I think we should hesitate with using the word "democratization" for the reasons that Chris has expressed.  And so I think it's quite an elegant solution here if we drop that from the overall theme.  Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thanks, Heather.  Valeria -- Bill first, I think.  Sorry.

>>BILL GRAHAM:   Thank you very much.  I think I would say very much along the same lines.  I really think that "democratization" really moves away from the kind of neutrality that the IGF has always taken.  I do obviously think that it's an important point and one that will be made from the floor during the meeting itself.  But I think that really we should stay more neutral.  
I'd also like to speak in favor of including the term "innovation" because I really think that innovation is one of the major policy goals that we strive for in Internet governance in many, many countries.  And looking at that theme and how governance can encourage innovation and growth is very important.  Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you, Bill.  
Valeria?

>>VALERIA BETANCOURT:   Thank you, Madam Chair.  I think Internet is one of the key avenue for participation we have so far, and many of us would like to see that the strengthening participation in the Internet brings us to improved development and democratization.  So I could really be in favor of keeping the word in the formulation and highlighted as one of the main elements of the sentence.  And perhaps I would like to propose a kind of different formulation that "Internet as driver for progress, access, development and democratization" because democratization is developed from democracy and democratization faces different challenges.
And our regimes -- democratic regimes -- I mean, regimes nowadays face -- most of our regimes are confronted to democracy currently.  So I could really be in favor of keeping that word in the sentence.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.  Qusai?

>>QUSAI AL-SHATTI:   If the word "democratization" would have some -- there is some reservation on the word "democratization," we can replace it with "leading social and economical changes" or we can rephrase it in that way.  If the word "democratization" would reference specific events according to some of my colleagues and we want to be neutral, we can replace it with "leading social and economical change," and that will be a neutral term.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Well, okay.  George.

>>GEORGE PAPADATOS:   Well, thank you.  I have a problem, too, in the sense that I cannot see the direct link.  I can see how the Internet enabled political change that could lead to democratization.  So probably this last suggestion as an enabler of political change may be more suited rather than putting the word "democratization" and giving the impression that there is a direct link between Internet and the process of democratization.  Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Ayesha, Waudo and then Michael.  And then I think I would like to close the discussion and move to the next.

>>AYESHA HASSAN:   Thank you, Madam Chair.  I just wanted to make a general comment that I think we are getting a little bit into the weeds, and we should probably focus on the fact that this is just an umbrella theme, basically, to allow PR for the event.  
Just because a word is there or not does not mean, as we've all experienced in the past five years, that any of those themes, topics, subthemes, related ideas cannot be discussed.  And so that's where I think we should go with the words that are less loaded, the words that are more understandable for the average person outside of this room and something that will allow the IGF Kenya to be easily marketed out there.  
So my sense is that where a few of the words that have come up in several interventions that are controversial in some way or misunderstood just shouldn't be in the title.  Thank you.

>>WAUDO SIGANGA:   Thank you, Chair.  I think Ayesha has summed it up well and I like what she just said.  The overall theme should be something that's going to be used for PR, for marketing particularly by the hosts.  So it has to be something that is acceptable and understood and understandable by all the people that would be participating in the event.
And I remember yesterday during the open consultations, there was a consensus that we really needed to incorporate the element of development in the discussions that are going to be there.  We thought it was an overarching theme.  I can see development is one of the words there.  That's one of the words that I agree with if we are going to talk about PR and about marketing the event, particularly from a developing country perspective.  
And it is a word that was also in last year's theme.  I think we have not talked about previous themes.  I think last year was coming up with a theme which was developing the future together.  So the word "development" is an important one.
So perhaps if I could just slightly change what I thought of Internet as a driver for -- What was it?  Number 11 -- as a driver of change, I would think of Internet as a driver for development and that could be overarching enough.  That would include access.  That would include democratization, freedom, innovation, anything that you can think of, development.  That would be a short enough and clearly understood overall theme that can be used for marketing and for PR.
And I think also the other important thing to remember is that it's important for the overall theme to be short because it is going to appear in the PR materials.  If you have a very long, long statement, I think it is also not practical.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you, Waudo.  Michael and then Chris.

>>MICHAEL KATUNDU:   Thank you, Madam Chair.  I would like to agree with the previous speakers, Ayesha and Waudo, that as we come up with this theme, we need to have the 12 in mind, the host country, that the challenges and the ease of marketing this theme out there and so attracting participants to our forum because there is a theme we can come up with and it divides the world into two or into various categories.
So I'm looking at -- yesterday, I recall, during the opening statements I did make a statement and informed the participants that Kenya is looking at having a theme during the pre-IGF event on youth, ICTs, innovation and entrepreneurship.  And I recall this was very widely supported by various participants.
I would like to still believe that the Item 11 as a driver of change and then access, development and innovation would take care of the main theme.  And it would bring out some aspect of context of the main theme at a broader level again.  And then when we drill into subthemes, then we are likely able to navigate a broader area of Internet and able to come up with other subthemes under that.
If we really want to go with by what we were supporting yesterday in the open consultations, then I recall development was widely accepted.  Innovation was widely accepted.  Access, you know, has been very key to developing countries.  So, again, I do not see contesting this as much.  Thank you, Chair.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you, Michael.  
I would really like to move on to the next and to also remind people that this is just the overall theme which needs to be really simple and smart, and then the rest could actually come under subthemes.  I'm inclined to say 11 seems to have received quite a lot of support with deleting "democratization" and "freedom."  And then we can discuss it online because we are spending too much time, or come back to it after we have discussed the rest.  I'm inclined to say let's move on to the subthemes, and then we can come back to it later.  If we don't have time during this face-to-face meeting, we will have to take this discussion online.  
I think I would like to move on to discussing subthemes now, please.
Avri, can you move us to the subthemes?  Okay.  I will read them quickly.

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Just quickly, we had our traditional five themes that we traditionally had.  We had a discussion yesterday on maybe changing those themes from subtopics that you see on page 2 at the bottom, summarized at the bottom.  So maybe we can start from there, discussing the subthemes for the next meeting.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   So I will read out quickly the subthemes that were discussed or offered yesterday:  Accountability and transparency; access to infrastructure; access to knowledge and discussion of concrete policy and the effect on knowledge, human rights; building an innovation economy; cross-border issues; data protection standards; privacy by design; privacy by default; Internet governance of principles on national and regional levels and linking this to the role of governments; the mobile Internet; new media, democracy, freedom, responsibilities; Open Source software and its implications for access to knowledge; the role of Internet intermediaries; then skilled innovation and enterprise as drivers of a development agenda; and then an open Internet around network neutrality on wired and mobile networks.  
Quite a number.  And some of them do capture our discussions -- the discussions we had previously on the general themes.  So I think let's think about that and try to bring some of these issues here.  Thank you.
May I have comments on the subthemes, please?  Okay.  Traditionally, we have had five subthemes and then emerging issues as the sixth.  So when we look at what was suggested yesterday, there are quite a number.  I think we need to agree on whether we should keep to the five subthemes and have emerging issues or shall we let the subthemes overflow to many more than -- we've traditionally kept them to five.  
I would like your opinions on that and which ones in particular, Ayesha.

>>AYESHA HASSAN:   Just a question.  Are the subthemes supposed to be the main sessions?

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   That is under discussion but, yes, they would drive the main sessions, the titles for the main sessions, if we're following the same program as last year.  I mean, I don't think we want a radical change this year.  We just want to maybe tweak it -- tweak things a little bit.  That's my personal view, but, you know, it's really open for discussion.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Chris?

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN:   Yeah, sorry.  Was the suggestion that we change the subthemes in accordance with the input from yesterday which produced effectively what sounds to me like a new list of subthemes?
>>ALICE MUNYUA:  Yes, that's the question.

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN:   And then the next question is, assuming the answer to that is yes, we have -- we really are limited to five because you can't -- in fact, I would argue four because you can't really do any more than that in the time that we've got.  
So are we being asked now to effectively choose four -- assuming you keep emerging issues, choose four from this new list?

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Yes, yes, that's what we're asking.  We choose four from the emerging list yesterday, yeah.  Through those subthemes, again --

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Sorry.  We don't have to choose four brand-new themes.  These themes we have been discussed can still fit in to the standard themes.  That's what I'm opening up for -- what we are opening up for discussion.  Does that make it clear?

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Waudo?

>>WAUDO SIGANGA:   We need to look at the new proposed themes one by one to see whether they can fit into the traditional four or five sessions and decide those one by one whether we all feel they should be taken up this year.

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   We can start.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   We can start.

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Like the first theme, managing critical Internet resources, should we keep that?

>> Yeah.

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Yes, okay.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Should we keep managing critical Internet resources?

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN:   Doesn't it rather depend on which of the -- what of the input we got yesterday naturally fits underneath this heading?

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Yes, and what fits under it.  That's the next question.

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN:   If nothing fits under it, what happens then?

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   It has to go.
[ Laughter ]
It will have to go.

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   As I say, this is a discussion.  We are not telling you what to do.  We are just trying to start the discussion.

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN:   Okay.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Valeria?

>>VALERIA BETANCOURT:   Thank you.  Just a very brief comment on the general themes.  I think the main sessions can be the traditional ones but phrasing as questions as was suggested yesterday in the open consultations, questions in relation to the main themes.  
So what access is needed for, whatever we agree on, development or -- it is just reminding that we are rephrasing the themes as questions.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Okay.  I agree with you because, in fact, if you look at the new recommendations yesterday, there is access to infrastructure, access to knowledge.  I think all those can come under access.  And then -- and we do have access as -- access and diversity from last year.  So I think we can retain that, maintain that and just add on access to knowledge, access to infrastructure.  That's just a suggestion.  I would like to hear what you think.
Yes, Theresa?

>>THERESA SWINEHART:   Madam Chair, I didn't mean to interrupt you in the midst of it.  I just wanted to show that I wanted to speak.  Shall I go ahead?  Yes.
It would be my suggestion that we actually try to keep the same headings as we have over the past years and look very much at progress and evolution of themes under those headings.  I think that provides new participants an opportunity to look at the dialogue over the course of the years but also allows us to show the evolution of discussions in various themes that come under those headings.  Maybe I'm being overly pragmatic.  But I think trying to keep the same subthemes and then looking at a shift of what comes under those dialogues would be a good way to progress.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.  Bill?

>>BILL GRAHAM:   Yes, thank you.  Just to recall that the subthemes that we've been using so far are derived pretty directly from the paragraph 72 of the Tunis Agenda.  And it was quite controversial getting to those five, so I would suggest what Theresa is suggesting.  Let's keep the main headings and then really work on making those relevant to this year's overall theme.  Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Great.  So there's general agreement that we keep the main themes.  But then there is some new ones that came up, and we will need to see where those fit into the five or the four.
Should we have that discussion now?  Yeah, please.  Yeah, the questions that would fall under those subthemes, the issues of access, I think we've covered that.  But what I think we need is to frame them, like there is overwhelming support into framing those as questions.  Perhaps if we can go through that.
The first one on managing critical Internet resources, I think framing that into a question and then finding the new proposed subthemes and where they fit in there.  Thanks.  May I have comments on that, please?  Ayesha?

>>AYESHA HASSAN:   Well, just to help get this started, as you mentioned, Madam Chair, the access issues could be under access and diversity and would lend themselves to some interesting questions.  
I also think that the cross-border issues could be brought up in the security, openness, and privacy main session discussion.  
For the most part, those cross-border issues touch on all three elements and that could be an interesting way to bring out those issues.  
The data protection standards, the privacy issues already would fit already under security, privacy and openness.  And the mobile Internet issues could be brought up under access and diversity.  A few suggestions, thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you, Ayesha.  Any other comments or suggestions?
The first one on managing critical Internet resources, I think framing that into a question, and then finding the new proposed subthemes and where they fit in there.
Thanks.  May I have comments on those, please.
Ayesha.

>>AYESHA HASSAN:   Well, just to help get this started, as you mentioned, Madam Chair, the access issues could be under access and diversity and would lend themselves to some interesting questions.
I also think that the cross-border issues could be brought up in the security.
openness and privacy main session discussion.  For the most part, those cross-border issues touch on all three elements and that could be an interesting way to bring out those issues.
The data protection standards, if the privacy issues already would fit under security, privacy and openness.
And the mobile issues could be brought up under access and diversity.
A few suggestions.
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you, Ayesha.  Any other comments or suggestions.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Yes.

>>ALVARO GALVANI:  Yes, Alvaro Galvani from Brazil.
Two questions just for brainstorming.  I remember yesterday, I think India had suggested if we could have the first two days after the opening ceremony and so on, the first two days of workshops and the last two days of the main sessions.  If we go that way, maybe we would have time only for four main sessions.  I don't know if this idea is already on the floor.  But it sounds interesting since it does not conflict -- there is no conflict between workshops and main sessions.
But just to remember that brainstorm.
A second question is -- what would be about managing critical Internet resources.
I was trying to exercise here some questions that could be -- that could be written under this subject.  And in the way that we discussed yesterday, we should look for questions in order to do the discussions more objective.
So I could read them just as a suggestion.  Thanks.
So for example, would be managing critical Internet resources.  What else the role of each stakeholder in managing critical Internet resources, question one.
Question two, IPv4 and IPv6 transition, burdens, impact, and opportunities for developing and developed countries.
Question three, how to evaluate accountability, transparency, and inclusiveness in the management of critical Internet resources.
Just an exercise.  Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Maybe it's a bit too fast.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   If you could repeat the questions so that she can --

>>ALVARO GALVANI:  Yes.  The first one, you got it, what's the role of each stakeholder.
The Section second one is IPv4/IPv6 transition, burdens, impact -- impacts and opportunities for developing and developed countries.
And -- and the third question -- the third question would be how to evaluate accountability, transparency, and inclusiveness in the management of critical Internet resources.
In a few minutes I intend to have a similar contribution in access to knowledge.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.
Chris.

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN:   Having spent the last three years running the critical Internet resources sessions, I think the first question is a really interesting question.  And it depends on how controversial one wants to get, but, I mean, you know, if I was moderating that session, one of the questions I might throw out there is something like so do we really want governments to run the Internet?  Do we really want civil society to run the Internet?  And so on.
So if you want to create some interesting discussion around it, that's a really interesting question.
The second one is really hard.  Last year -- Last year, Jeanette and I struggled a lot to try and come up with anything useful to say about IPv4 and IPv6 that wasn't simply a report that we had almost -- once again, almost had run out of IPv4 addresses and everyone is really keen on IPv6 being used.  So that's a really tough one, I would say.  And I'm not really sure I understand the third one.  Perhaps we can get more information on that because I'm not sure what you mean by "how to evaluate."  That sounds to me like do you mean there should be some sort of report card to some body that evaluates how your accountability and transparency is going?

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you, Chris.
Alvaro, would you like to respond to the last question?

>> ALVARO GALVANI:  Yes.  The third question in that sense.  I have no answer in mind, I have no target in mind.  I'm not intending to suggest that a body would have the power to evaluate it.  I would just try to find criterias in order we can go a bit deeper in that discussion.
I remember, for example, accountability and transparency is a theme that's already -- are two expressions that are already being used by ICANN and the review team.  So I believe that IGF could also contribute in going deep in that discussion.
I don't have a target to reach with this question.  We can improve this third question, if necessary.
Thanks.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Okay.  Bill.

>>BILL GRAHAM:  Yeah, I just wanted to pass on an idea I received from Vint Cerf when I was consulting within ISOC to see if we had proposals.  And he recommended that we use the critical Internet resources session to assess how the community is doing with implementing IPv6, DNSSEC in the root, RPKI and other security mechanisms, which I think we could certainly phrase that as a question.  And it allows us to ask the entire community how they assess the progress that's being made in all of these new kinds of attempts to improve critical Internet resources so that it impacts on the other main themes as well.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.
Shall we change the last one?
Okay.

>>BILL GRAHAM:  Yes, just to -- I'm trying to see which last one it is.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   How to evaluate accountability, transparency, and inclusiveness.

>>BILL GRAHAM:  Yes, more how to evaluate the implementation of -- well, let me see.  Specifically, IPv6 and security mechanisms on the Internet.  That would be the short way do it.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Okay.  And security mechanisms on the Internet.
Thank you.

>> Thank you, Madam Chair.  Just wanted to propose a new question there under management of critical Internet resources to say is there a need for transformation in the management of the critical Internet resources?  So the transformation would actually include inclusiveness, would include capacity building, would include the other aspects.  And therefore we would cover many of the questions that are there under the subtheme.
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Could you repeat the question so that Avri is able to capture it?

>> Yes, madam.  The question I am trying to put forward, is there a need for transformation of management of critical Internet resources?

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.
Waudo.

>>WAUDO SIGANGA:   First of all, just to say that I support Ayesha's proposal that issues of cross-border -- the cross borders be under openness, security and privacy.
And then a additional question on access and diversity.  Perhaps we could ask a question, how is the management of the Internet impacting on the transformation of education, innovation, and entrepreneurship?

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   That's under access and diversity, yeah?

>>WAUDO SIGANGA:   Under access and diversity.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Yeah, if you could repeat it so Avri can capture it.

>>WAUDO SIGANGA:   How is the management of the Internet impacting on the transformation of education, innovation, and entrepreneurship.
Then just a general comment -- Have you got that?  Impacting -- sorry.  On the transformation -- come down.
The transformation of education, innovation, and entrepreneurship.
Then, Madam Chair, there was also an issue that was mentioned by -- or a proposal that was mentioned by Alvaro about having two days of workshops followed by two days of main sessions.  I think that's something that has actually been discussed in the past, and if I remember correctly, the guidance that we were given was that the U.N. normally sets aside some resources for these meetings, and particularly for translation services.  And if you are going to have some days when those resources are not going to be needed, it may actually impact on the overall availability of those resources.
So I think it is something that we looked at in the past and we agreed that we should be having the main sessions over the four days, just to be able to have the U.N. resources.  I may be corrected --

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   That is correct because if we are using the resources of interpreters in the plenary room, they have to be contiguous days, and also the timing as well because they are very highly unionized and we cannot go over a set limit in the time of using them.  So we have to spread it out over the four days.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Chris.

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN:   Thank you, Alice.
Perhaps I'm just tired.  I don't understand what "How is the management of the Internet impacting on the transformation of education, innovation, and entrepreneurship" actually means.
If we're -- The reason why you can say management of critical Internet resources, using that term "management in critical Internet resources" is because there are clear understandings of what critical Internet resources are.
Management of the Internet, I don't under- -- there is no Internet to management.  If it's a question about the management of critical Internet resources impacting on those things, then that should be up in critical Internet resources.  But I'm not clear on what it has to do with access and diversity.  It may be just because I don't understand it.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you, Chris.  Waudo, would you like to --

>>WAUDO SIGANGA:   Yeah, I just have a supporter here who says it is a question.  Since it is a question, let it remain a question.
So you'd like us to change it to critical Internet resources?

>> (Speaking off microphone)
(Dropped audio)

>>WAUDO SIGANGA:   What would be a proposed change?
Critical Internet resources instead of "Internet"?

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN:   Sorry, no.  It's not that I -- I'm not saying that.  I'm saying my first point -- sorry, it's me trying to cram too many points into one paragraph.
My first point is I don't understand what you mean.  I don't understand what that question actually means.  Could you perhaps provide some explanation of what you mean by that?
Give me an example of something that you might discuss underneath that question, perhaps.

>>WAUDO SIGANGA:   My first thought is that, okay, let's take an example, education.  It's evolving.  It's transforming because of the Internet.
So I really want to explore the different ways of managing the Internet.  Do they have some impact on that transformation?

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Michael and then Fouad.

>>MICHAEL KATUNDU:   (Speaking off microphone).
Sorry, sorry.  I think I can see where Chris Disspain is coming from, and we probably rephrase it, rephrase the question and talk of how is the development of the Internet, instead of management of the Internet, so that it can still remain within our theme, and all these issues can now come out depending on how the subthemes are raised.
Thank you, Chair.

>>WAUDO SIGANGA:   That was the change I was looking for.  Thank you, Michael.

>>FOUAD BAJWA:   Fouad thank you.  My colleague has given a good idea to it.  Otherwise, I was going to say something like how does the Internet aid on the transformation of education, innovation and entrepreneurship.  That's the basic problem, how is it aiding it from traditional to innovative systems and so forth.
I also wanted to seek some advice probably on whether we could bring access to knowledge and access to diversity.
Within this regard, I'd like to refer back to IGC's recommendations to the Secretariat about access to knowledge.  It's actually to help you raise some (dropped audio) Internet in aiding development, education, and culture, both within and between countries.
Empowerment to fully benefit from today's ICTs is particularly important for people who struggle with poverty or who are otherwise marginalized in society.
I think we can pose certain questions.  For example, how does access aid in fighting poverty?  How does access impact issues of intellectual property rights?  How does access impact countries which are not supporting open platforms for learning, innovating, sharing, or producing content?
All on content, basically.
Yeah, this is the input so far.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   One question we didn't capture, if you could repeat it.  I think it was on intellectual property.

>>FOUAD BAJWA:   How does intellectual property impact countries that do not support open platforms for learning, innovating, sharing, and production of content?

>> (Speaking off microphone)

>>FOUAD BAJWA:   Yeah, how does access impact intellectual property rights in countries that do not support open platforms for learning, innovating, sharing and production of content.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   So it's one question.

>>FOUAD BAJWA:   Mm-hmm.
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   And then Ayesha.

>> Thank you.  Under access and diversity, I would like to add the following discussion items.
The right for equal and free access to the Internet, and the balance between individual rights to access the Internet and the sovereign role and regulating it.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   If you please repeat the questions so they can....

>> Sure.
Shall I....

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Please go ahead.

>> Yes.  The right for equal and the free access to the Internet.  And the balance between individual rights to access the Internet and the sovereign role to regulate it.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Okay.

>> That's in the access and diversity.
In the openness -- Yes.  I would say that we would like to discuss the impacts of regulating digital content.  And moving toward participatory and inclusive -- a participatory, inclusive Internet.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   So (off microphone).

>> What is the impact of regulating digital content.  And the second question would be how to move toward a participatory, inclusive Internet?

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   How to move towards a participatory --

>> How to move towards a participatory and inclusive Internet.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Internet.

>> And the Internet for development -- Sorry.
I would like to include a question, and how to promote an Internet governance framework of principles on a regional or national levels.  How to promote Internet governance framework of principles on regional and national levels.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Is that all?

>> I just have one more question.
And how Internet can be a tool of change -- or how can Internet lead change?  Sorry.  How can Internet lead change on social, economic, and political dimensions?

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.
Nurani.

>>NURANI NIMPUNO:   Thank you.  I have two suggestions.  One is following up on Bill's comments on the critical Internet resources session.  And I would like to support his suggestions there.
I think the discussions in the critical Internet resource sessions, which has really been one of the most successful main sessions in the last few IGFs, have become more focus and mature, and I think moving it away from -- or not going back to some of the high-level theoretical discussions and -- makes for more interesting discussion.
So looking at -- especially since we have been following the transition from IPv4 to IPv6, IANA's pool of IPv4 addresses has now been depleted.  In June there will be the IPv6 well day, which we will -- which will probably give us a lot of interesting things to base our discussions on.  There will be a lot of lessons learned from that.
So to look at what is the state of IPv6, what's the uptake and issues around that.
Also with the root being signed, I think there's some interesting discussions to be had about DNSSEC and RPKI.
And then my other suggestion is more of a general one.  Someone mentioned it yesterday, that really making sure to bring in a development aspect in all the sessions would be useful.  And maybe even adding some questions about what is the impact on development here or what is the -- Yeah, what is the development aspect within this particular main session.
I think that would be useful.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you, Nurani.

>> (Speaking off microphone)

>>NURANI NIMPUNO:   Sorry, I didn't hear that.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   The development impact of IPv6?  Is that what you are suggesting as a question to respond to the development issue?

>>NURANI NIMPUNO:   Yes, I am not sure about the exact wording, but --

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Because what we have --

>>NURANI NIMPUNO: -- something along those lines.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   -- there is what is the impact of development of IPv6 and security deployment?  Okay?
All right.
Ayesha and then UNESCO.

>>AYESHA HASSAN:   Thank you.
One just procedural issue.  I don't know if it's the same for others, but I am getting a little bit confused about where people have added questions and where I need to go back to, you know, discuss them.
It might be, at some moment, easier if we just go through each section and people make comments only on that topic.
I'll try to remember a few of the things that I wanted do.
I agree with Nurani that there was a lot of support for the cross-cutting theme of development, and maybe we go through and just have a placeholder question on development.  The development angle on X, Y, Z issue, what are the issues, what are the concerns, challenges, whatever the case might be.
We had also put forward the idea of building an innovation economy as being a cross-cutting kind of theme.  And I would also ask that we consider that angle in each of the topics.  How do you address the policy, regulatory, legal issues in a way that would promote entrepreneurship, innovation?
Under access and diversity -- Sorry, I'll speak a little bit less fast.
Under access and diversity, I'm not really sure where we're going on the bullet about intellectual property rights.  I think that there are intellectual property rights that are issues that will be very important to come out in the context of several of these discussions, both as an awareness raising.  There is a lot of work being done at WIPO, for instance.
So my sense is maybe that the bullet as it is now, how does access impact intellectual property rights in countries that do not support online platforms, et cetera, is extremely detailed.  And obviously if anyone wants to bring up discussions about particular platforms and particular issues surrounding that, that could become part of their contribution, but it might be helpful to just end that draft question after "rights."
I also wanted to suggest, under access and diversity, that we have a bullet, something like what does it take to attract private investment in infrastructure?  That's a basic for access.
And I wanted to suggest that we have a question in there about how to handle legal and nonlegal resources and content.
And I'll save the rest for another time.
Thanks.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.
UNESCO, please.

>>UNESCO:   Thank you.
Also, I think it's a good proposal, procedural proposal, to go by themes, and everyone contributes to the different subtheme.  So I would like to, under access and diversity, highlight, of course, that for UNESCO, the access to information and knowledge is essential, but one dimension is not covered yet and I would like to add the multilingualism and this aspect, which is, of course, also essential for access in terms of access as we have seen in the discussion yesterday.
So how are different stakeholders contributing to a diverse multilingual Internet?
I would keep other comments, then, if we go to the --

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   To the next.  Thank you.
Freida, please.

>> Thanks.  Just two things.  First of all, security, openness and privacy.  I just thought one question could be what are the rights of citizens to global information in closed in regions?  What are the rights of citizens to global information in closed off regions?
Can you hear me?

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Okay.

>> And then under "access and diversity," and I think this is more of a problem you have in certain developing countries, and I think to an extent we have this in Nigeria as well, how do you increase content in countries where there are no institutions that produce transformational content?
How do you increase content in countries where there are no institutions that produce transformational content?
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Michael and then Fouad.

>>MICHAEL KATUNDU:   Thank you, Madam Chair.  I think on security, openness -- Scroll up.  Up as well.  Scroll up.  The IPv6, I want to make -- How do you evaluate?  How do we evaluate the implementation of IPv6?  I want to suggest that we can bring out an aspect or so of improvement of the evaluation.  So we can say:  How do we evaluate and promote -- I would suggest we add the word "promote," because by evaluating, if you find the adoption is not so much, then we may need to do something.
Instead of the implementation, we have a technical word we like to use for IPv6, "transition."  We like to use the word "transition" as opposed to just "implementation."  So I would suggest we go to -- "transition to IPv6" because we already have IPv4 in use.
I would also suggest, Chair, we bring out an aspect of promotion of capacity-building and IG issues, that we go to subtheme:  How do we promote capacity-building and Internet governance issues because that's where we were talking about bringing in parliamentarians and youths so we can create critical mass.
At the same time, I would suggest we bring out an aspect on access.  Where do we place that, capacity-building and --

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Remind you that yesterday there was overwhelming support for capacity-building as a cross-cutting theme.  So I think we have to think about it through all the five themes.

>>MICHAEL KATUNDU:   Okay, good.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Yes.  And even critical Internet resources, we need to think about a capacity-building question there.

>>MICHAEL KATUNDU:   Good.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   So you can please contribute.

>>MICHAEL KATUNDU:   Thank you, Chair.  I also suggest we bring out the aspect of access, how do we promote access and innovation?  Because at the end of the day, what are we going to do?  We still need to have innovative ways of doing things.  That's not just access.  
And there is also a very important item of access, Internet exchange points.  I think we need to bring -- we need to have a question on how do we promote implementation and probably also linkage or joining the connection of Internet exchange points.  Because if you have one operating alone, then you may not be able to derive the benefits meant to come out of the connectivity of the Internet.  Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Can you phrase that as a question that can be taken?

>>MICHAEL KATUNDU:   Yes.  How do we promote -- I think it can be under access.  How do we promote implementation and interconnection of IXPs, Internet exchange points.  You can bring in the power of regional connectivity and beyond the regional.  Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   I think I would like to take the process suggestion first, before I go to the next speakers, to see whether we have exhausted questions on managing -- also to make Avri's work easier and all of us.  So have we exhausted questions on managing critical Internet resources?  Unless it is a critical Internet resource, then I would move to the next, yeah?  So Fouad.

>>FOUAD BAJWA:   Thank you, Chair.  My intervention is based on the process that we are following right now.  I think we are consuming too much time on this, number one thing.
Number two thing, my suggestion is not to lose the focus that we have within workshops actually contributing to main sessions and the linkage of main sessions with workshops.  So if you look at this process, I think when the proposal for workshops actually is sent out and the types of workshops that come and will actually give us more concrete questions or ideas for filling of these gaps, I think if we maintain maybe just a small brief of points on this but not these expansive questions which are, at the end of the day, to be led by the participants themselves, what kind of problems they're facing or what are their needs, those proposals are going to come in from the people.  I would like to use our limited time very valuably, number one thing.
Number two thing, I would like to suggest that we leave more of the detail as a result of the subjects -- or the topics of workshops that would come in from the overall Internet governance community.
And Number 3 is that we focus on the other important issues at hand.  Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   We've got the subthemes, in fact, as one of the most important because the rest of them are about structure and the program.  So we do need to deal with the themes because, I think, MAG needs to have had consensus around the main theme and the subthemes before -- because the rest are quite easy.
I agree with you that we seem to be spending so much time on the questions.  As the MAG, if we can just limit it to very general questions and the main subthemes rather than going to the details, I agree the workshops will bring the details up.  So perhaps -- and also follow  the process so we are able to finish and be effective.
And so if we feel that under managing critical Internet resources we've covered most of the main questions that we would want to ask, then we can move on and look at -- what's the next one?  Access, is it?  The next one is security, openness and privacy.  
And also please keep in mind there were suggestions around human rights, for example, more about Internet and new media and where those would fall in.  We need to keep that in mind so they are not left hanging.  Thank you.
Raul first, please.

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA:   Yes.  I think it is very difficult to follow this discussion.  In fact, I am raising my tag a long time ago and I didn't have an opportunity to speak yet on those issues, and I'm trying to follow all the discussion and different themes.
So before, I raised my tag for doing other comments.  But now that you are proposing to move to a new topic, before leaving the critical Internet resources, I would like to be sure that everybody is on the same page and everybody is clear on what we're including here.  
So I would appreciate if you can leave for a couple of minutes the part of the documents to refer to that because I think that probably we need to give a final look on that.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Chengetai?

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Yes, I totally agree with you that we were a bit jumping all over the place.  But I think it is best to go through each of the topics.

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA:   Absolutely.  But if I understand well, you are proposing now to move on --

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Yes.

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA: -- and to leave critical Internet resources.

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Yes.

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA:   I didn't have opportunity yet to speak on that.

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Do you want to say anything on it?

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA:   Other colleagues have spoken many times but -- so I want to be sure that everybody understand what we are -- we have in this list probably to make a last call for making comments.

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Okay.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   The list is there.

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   If anybody -- I'm sorry.  If anybody, I'm sorry, but other than Fouad, would like to speak, you can come in, on this topic.

>> Just a small suggestion again from last time's experience, maybe -- would it be possible to explore that we break into working groups actually on the themes, on the subthemes and actually come out with these topics instead of -- otherwise, it is really getting confusing for even me to follow.  We are jumping too much in the themes.

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Let's why we are just saying let's just do it sequentially so that we don't jump around.  We just go through it sequentially, and then it will minimize confusion.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Can we close on critical Internet resources and move to the next?  Raul?

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA:   Thank you, again.  First point, it seems that exchange points are in both critical Internet resources and access.  Typically, we have included this point under access.  This is critical Internet resources, right?

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Which one?

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   Yeah.

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA:   Okay.  Could you please show the first bullets.  Okay.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Those are suggestions from yesterday's discussions.

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA:   Yes.  Those are the ones --

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   The new subthemes, yes.

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA:   Okay, thank you very much.
I think that the proposal to include -- this question is there on transformation of the management of critical Internet resources.  I think that this is what we have been discussing since 2004.  So I think that there is no need to include this point as one of the themes.  This is the overall -- the theme about critical Internet resources.  
And, in fact, we have been dealing with many proposals in this field as there have been many transformations in the mechanisms.  So I don't think -- it seems like we are assuming there is a need and we are looking for what are the transformations that are needed.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   So are you suggesting that we delete it --

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA:   Yes.

>>ALICE MUNYUA: -- or highlight it?  Okay.  Any other comments?

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA:   Yes, probably I think the transition to IPv6, we are mentioning security.  And security will probably be under security and openness session.  But I think that's -- regarding IPv6, I think probably what we have to identify is not only to have a state of the art of the evaluation in the transition to IPv6 but also to identify if there is any off-cycle in that, trying to raise concerns and what are the problems that people could be facing to adopt IPv6.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.
Any other comments on the critical Internet resources?  Okay.  Then we can move onto the next one on security, openness and privacy.  Any comments, any questions around -- okay.  So we will leave those as -- UNESCO?

>>UNESCO:   I think some topics are not yet really covered and even some areas are not covered.  For example, what is a link between new media and journalism's role?  The entire area is not -- or more generally, how can security, openness and privacy be ensured at the same time?  If it is -- a chapeau for different workshops, that would be a big one.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.  And there was a suggestion from ICC, I think, around having cross-border issues and data protection and security, openness and privacy.  Those are the two new issues that were suggested yesterday.  Thank you.
Any other comments on security?  Brazil?

>>BRAZIL:   Yes, thank you.  I would suggest (dropped audio).  Word "openness," that's traditionally less dealt with during the discussions.  So it is very important to add a specific question for this.  And I think that the right question would be necessity -- or the principle of network neutrality in Internet architecture.  Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   What are the principles?

>>BRAZIL:   No, no.  We could rephrase in a question like, challenges to the principle of network neutrality -- what are the challenges to the principle of network neutrality of the Internet?  Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.  Any other issue or theme that should be brought under security and openness?  Okay.
Then we can move on to access and diversity.  There were quite a number of suggestions on access and diversity.  So unless there is any additions -- yes, Raul?

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA:   Thank you, Madam Chair.  I'm a bit worried about this session because I feel that we are proposing to discuss exactly the same things that we have been discussing in the last few years.  I think we have spent a lot of time in discussing about the benefits of setting up Internet exchange points, developing local contents.  
Even we have talked about low-price technologies for promoting access.  I think what is happening around the world, that we are -- Internet is in many, many countries.  It is even growing in developing regions.  Within the regions there are different realities.
And so we have in Latin America countries that have 40, 45% of Internet penetration.  But we still have other countries that have very low penetration, less than 10%.  
So I think what we have to explore is:  What are the problems that those countries are facing?  What are the problems that they are facing?  What are the problems -- what are the reasons because the Internet is not growing in those.  The access accessing is not growing in those countries and how Internet governance can help to solve those problems.
We need -- a need that we have to identify -- because obviously what we have been doing in those past years have been very effective in some ways but has not been effective for some countries or from some regions.  So I think we need to identify what are the real problems that these people are facing in order to provide solutions.  Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Raul, if I understand, are you suggesting that some of the questions, for example, on interconnection and IPv6 we have dealt with over and over again?  So are you suggesting that we have one main question that looks at the challenges of access or --

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA:   It is just a reflection.  I think we have to challenge ourselves --

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   To go beyond?

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA: -- in this point not to repeat what we have done in the past years and think what really we need to discuss in order to help the countries in which the Internet penetration is lowest.  Obviously, the solutions that we have been providing in the last five years are not enough for some countries, for some communities.  So, okay, we can discuss again what are the benefits of the Internet exchange points, but this is what we have been doing.  Probably we have to do that again.  I'm not saying no.  
What I'm saying is that we have to challenge ourselves in this moment, trying to be innovative in the approach that we take regarding access.  
As what I want to know, personally is what is happening in those countries?  What are the problems that you are facing?  Why the Internet growing -- accessing is not growing in your country?  Is it because you ignore what are the best technologies?  Is it because of a problem of money?  Is it a problem of regulation?  Or is it a problem of political decisions?  This is what we need to identify in order to be in the best position -- in a better position not only at IGF but all the organizations that are involved within this ecosystem to provide -- to go away from the next meeting in Kenya as being clear in what we have to do in the next year in order to help those countries to improve their Internet penetration and access for the communities.  Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Okay, thank you.  So we leave all the questions and then you have added what are the problems being faced.  That's okay.  Thank you.

>> I would just like to add, I know the list is big but just to add two questions and then just to be useful for everyone, the first question would be what are the main obstacles to access to knowledge online today?  This makes clear the idea of access to knowledge in an only question.  And the second question would be access to infrastructure -- how do you say?  I don't know how to say that in English.

>> (speaker off microphone.)

>> No, no, access to infrastructure.  And then I would do the question.  Yes, that's it.
Technical, commercial, and policy obstacles at the national and international levels.  Thank you very much.

>> Just referring to Raul's former comments, I think it is also important that the IGF has the capacity-building functions we have been talking about before and, therefore, that there is some repetition, does not -- and continuation of topics through different IGFs does not -- they shouldn't stop us, I believe.
In terms of access and diversity, there is one group of people with disabilities which have not been mentioned at all so far.  And I think it would good just to have that part covered, too, with a question on how can Internet governance contribute to the access -- to access for people with disabilities.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.  Cathy?  Okay, Valeria?

>>VALERIA BETANCOURT:   Thank you, Alice.  In relation to access to infrastructure, public access is still a main challenge in some developing countries.  So I would suggest a question that has to do with:  What is the role that states can play in ensuring access?

>>ALICE MUNYUA:  Cathy?

>>CATHY HANDLEY:   Thank you, Madam Chair.  We seem to keep falling back into the same kind of sinkhole.  We're determining what the challenges are.  We say:  Is the challenge X?  Is the challenge Y?  Instead of saying, Identify what you think the challenges are.  
I mean, challenges in Kenya may be totally different than they are in the U.S., than they are in Lithuania.  I don't think we can put them in little boxes.  
And we've boxed this up now for five years.  Now is a chance to open up the boxes and see if there is other challenges because apparently we haven't fixed them all yet.  Thanks.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   UNESCO?  No, okay.  It is quite a lot, quite a number of questions under access.  So I think the Secretariat will help us on how to move forward with that.  But for now, I think we can move on to the next Internet governance for development and just finalize with that and then emerging issues.  
Internet governance for development.  Ayesha and then Raul and then Waudo.

>> Can I make a last comment on access?

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Yes.

>> It is just an idea, but why don't we bring to the main session representatives of a couple of countries -- developing countries that have improved very much the Internet access in their countries in the last few years?  So we could identify what are the regional sections of those countries, just an example of showing to other countries in the world.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Okay.  Waudo -- no, yeah.  Ayesha and then Waudo and then India.

>> (inaudible).

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Okay, thank you.  Ayesha?

>>AYESHA HASSAN:   Thank you.  I see that the Internet governance for development topic is there, and I guess it's being proposed as a main session.  I wasn't sure that there was full support for keeping a main session on that topic.  I know that myself and others had suggested that this is such an important cross-cutting issue that needs to be now taken up in every single topic that we're discussing, that perhaps the experience of last year was a useful one and this year we build to integrate it more fully into every discussion and not have a single main session on it.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Yes.  Waudo?

>>WAUDO SIGANGA:   Madam Chair, that's exactly what I was going to say.  I think we need to determine, first of all.  And I think the trend yesterday of the thinking was that it should be incorporated in all the sessions rather than being a session on its own.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Yes.  So shall we have it out and rather ask the development question on each of the other themes instead?  More as a cross-cutting issue like we are doing with capacity-building?  Is that okay?  Okay.  Thank you.  So we are deleting Internet governance for development and rather going back and ensuring that the theme runs through all the other subthemes.

>>ALVARO GALVANI:   In this case --

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Yes, Alvaro.

>>ALVARO GALVANI:   In this case, if there is a proposal under the table, I think we should have a bit of time just to consider.
But in this case, I would suggest to separate, to separate the questions into blocks under each issue.  Maybe we should separate the questions into blocks and then make the necessary highlight to questions for development.
But this is something we should think a little bit more.  And we can discuss after -- today in the afternoon.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Yes, yes, we can think about it in the afternoon.  So in this case, we are then left with the last theme, emerging issues.
And then we still have some themes that were suggested yesterday.  Building an innovation economy that have not found a place.  Building an innovation economy.  The mobile Internet.  The role of Internet intermediaries.  And then open Internet network neutrality.  I think that was covered in critical Internet resources.  Yeah.
So we've still got the mobile Internet, new media and democracy, and the role of Internet intermediaries.  And also building an innovation economy as topics or themes, suggested themes that haven't found place yet.
So would those be emerging issues or would we find -- would we place them under some of the main subthemes?
Thank you.  Valeria.

>>VALERIA BETANCOURT:   Actually, it's not a comment on the themes -- theme itself but just to let you know that Olga Cavalli and Katitza Rodriguez are willing to participate remotely.  So if we have any information about how they can join the meeting, that would be very appreciated.
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Chengetai.

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   The meeting is being Webcast and there is there is live transcription.  Do they want to make a vocal intervention?  Then they could join as -- I'll ask -- Yes.  They will be receiving an e-mail soon.
It's who?  Olga and Katitza.  Okay; fine.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   So any comments -- So you've only got four subthemes now:  Critical Internet resources; security, openness and privacy; access and diversity.  Do we need another one or shall we just dealing with emerging issues now?
Chris.

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN:   If you have another one, then you can't -- you can't do emerging resources session, I think.
You have got -- Last year we had the four plus emerging, didn't we, I think?
So if you want to try and do five, which is fine, then you have got to drop emerging because you won't have enough sessions, I think.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   So we can deal with emerging issues, then.
Ayesha.

>>AYESHA HASSAN:   Sorry, I was just going to add, too, we normally would have a taking stock of IG and way forward session.  And I think that there is a positive way of integrating the building an innovation economy also as a track through all of the issue areas.  So we don't need a separate session on that.  It can be built in.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Okay.
So we need --
Taking stock?  I think we have that.  And then building an innovation economy again becomes more or less like a cross-cutting issue.
Any other ideas on emerging issues?
Okay.  I think we may need a break.  People are tired.
So if you could finish -- if there are no other suggestions -- Okay.  Michael.

>>MICHAEL KATUNDU:   Thank you, Chair.
Sorry to take us slightly back on the building of the innovation -- of an innovation economy in developing countries.  Chair, this is quite key to us, and again I want to take the MAG members to yesterday's discussion, and there was a lot of support to an issue that we bring out the aspect of innovation.
This is quite key to us coming from developing countries, and particularly we are looking at a very interesting scenario of mobile banking evolving as opposed to the west, the north.  In the developing countries, the mobile banking, because of the high penetration of mobile -- mobile voice and data and so forth, we are now increasingly relying on that.
And I would think it's a good opportunity to share and to see whether we can have something for our brothers and sisters to take back to, also, their countries.
So, Chair, I would really request -- or, rather, ask the indulgence of the participants that we can have this issue discussed and the emerging aspects of the Internet as a separate topic.  It's quite key to us.
Thank you.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you, Michael.
So you are suggesting that building an innovation economy becomes one of the emerging issues.  Okay.
UNESCO.

>>UNESCO:   I'm sorry if I didn't follow all the subtitles for the security, openness and privacy area.
Just I think it was quite painful for us to see out of the overall title both freedom and democratization eliminated.  I think it would have been good to keep at least democracy or at least freedom, but not cut out this entire area which has become so essential for Internet governance, for all development, for everything which the Internet has been associated.  Also in late developments.
So I think it will be part of the attraction of the Internet Governance Forum and it could still be hard to cut it out of the title so I would make a little pledge again for including "freedom" or "democracy," at least one of them but not cutting both out.  And also to have, then, freedom of expression somehow mentioned at least in these themes as a term, as a question.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.
Raul and then Fouad.

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA:   Very easy.  I support 100 percent what the representative of UNESCO has said.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.

>>FOUAD BAJWA:   Just a question.  Are we revisiting the overall theme now?

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   No.
Chris, Valeria.  No, Chris now.  Valeria.

>>VALERIA BETANCOURT:   In the same lines that Raul said, very short intervention.  I also support UNESCO's proposal.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Thank you.  All right.  I would like to suggest an early lunch or an early break.  Then we can come back -- Oh.

>> Just an intervention on -- from the early question by Chris, and the interest by the observers.
I think that after lunch, we should actually include the observers.  This is an informal session and I don't see why we can't have the observers participate.

>>CHENGETAI MASANGO:   We can have a discussion just amongst the MAG members later.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   They are suggesting later we have a discussion just around the observers around the MAG members.  So perhaps if we come back 15 minutes early just to sort this issue out.  I don't know what you all, what MAG members think.
So we can come back at 2:30.  Yeah.

>> Well, could we not come back at quarter past 2:00 given that gives us two hours for lunch?  The sooner we come back, the sooner we can start.

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   2:15.  We have 15 minutes MAG discussion to decide on the way forward of observers, and then we start the meeting at 2:30.  Is that okay?

>> So to be clear, Madam Chair, the MAG members will come back first?

>>ALICE MUNYUA:   Yes.  That's the suggestion from the Secretariat.  Yes.
Thank you.  So enjoy lunch and we see you MAG members at quarter past, and everybody else at 2:30.
[ Lunch break ]