2019 IGF - MAG - Virtual Meeting - XI

The following are the outputs of the real-time captioning taken during an IGF virtual call. 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, but should not be treated as an authoritative record. 


>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Greetings from an incredibly hot Geneva.  We will wait a few minutes for the people who started the program a little bit late for the program to load.

 Good evening, afternoon and morning, ladies and gentlemen.  Welcome to MAG virtual meeting number 11.  So just the usual reminders, the meeting is being recorded, transcribed.  The summary report will come out a couple of days after the meeting.  We are using the speaking queue and Luis will paste in the speaking queue link into the chat.  With that I will hand over the meeting.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you, Chengetai.  And thank you for joining in the early days of summer, and as Chengetai said, we know it's very early and very late for various individuals, but as we always say, it's important to rotate the time of these meetings.  The first item of business is the adoption of the agenda.  It was sent a week or so ago.  It's posted in the chat room as well.  See if there are any comments or questions or any other requests for the AOB.  I will give it the usual slow count to 6.

  Yes.  So I don't see any other requests for AOB or any comments so we will call the agenda approved and Berndt is noting he is part of the IGF host country team and Daniela's team.

So welcome barren and thank you for joining us again.  I know it's late there.  The first item of business I want to thank everybody for all of the work that's happened here over the last few weeks since the physical meeting especially with respect to some of the main session preparations.  We think it's really important that we get an early start on this, if you will, because it's difficult to get a lot of work done over July and August.  It takes a little bit longer, but, of course, we can't leave it until September to get started either.

So that's a pretty significant piece of our agenda today.  The other item we need to make some substantive progress on is the thematic introductory sessions and the wrap up sessions what we used to call it the talking and tailing sessions so we will get to that in one of the later items as well.  With that I will turn it to the Secretariat to see if they have any other updates and Baron, we will give the floor to you to see if there are additional updates from the host country team.  Chengetai, you have the floor.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Thank you very much, Lynn.

For the Secretariat updates, just to note that on 30th of June we closed the MAG renewal nomination process.  Now, we are just going to go through the names and compile them and send them to New York for processing as well as the Chair nominations.  This is going to be the last session that we are going to have with WebEx.  We are now going to switch over to Zoom.  We have the licenses for Zoom now so hopefully Zoom will be much, much better for people with disabilities because it works very well with Screen Readers, et cetera.

WebEx did not, so that is why we are switching over to Zoom, and this is the last WebEx session we are going to have for our official meetings.  We will still have access to WebEx for any other meetings that we may, if we do need the extra rooms above and beyond the Zoom rooms.

Also, workshop organizers have been informed and the workshops are now open for editing again so that workshop proponents can put in the proper agenda and update their workshops so that's opened up for editing.  The travel grants as well, the process that we had for the travel grants, the application period has ended.  We received over 830 applications for travel grant and we can only service, let's say, 10% of those, about 80 grants available for people to travel to the IGF 2019.

As you know, these are reserved for people from the Global South, especially those people who are underrepresented in past IGF annual meetings, and preference will be given to those that have an active role in the 2019 meeting, whether they are panelists or workshop proponents, et cetera.

And thanks again to the Government of Germany for providing those funds.  We do have the Draft Agenda almost ready.  I think we would be able to publish, have a first public draft at the end of this week.  We usually have people coming back to us after we have published it saying can you please move the session because it clashes with another session, the panelists ant be in two places at once, et cetera.

So we hope to publish that by the end of this week.  I think that's all the updates from the Secretariat unless I missed something.  I will just give a beat for other people to chime in if I missed anything.  It seems I didn't miss anything.  Lynn, back to you.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you, Chengetai.  The only thing I might mention is we have color coded all of the Open Forums DCNRI sessions in line with the three main thematic tracks as well which I hope is going to give encouragement in both ways, encouragement to people that have interest in those themes to look into the DCNRI and Open Forum sessions as well for different topics and perspectives, and likewise encouragement to those entities that are hosting those workshops to really tie into and further integrate their work into the main session.  So hopefully that will, I think, pull more viewpoints into all of the sessions and workshops as well.

So thank you to the Secretariat for taking the time to do that.  Baron, do you have any update you would like to provide from the host country?

>> This is Baron from the host country.  As far as I know, there has been no important changes since the last meeting in June here in Berlin.  But I am not quite sure because I was like others here on the call last week at ICANN in Marrakech, and if there should be any changes, I will ask my colleagues to inform the Secretariat as soon as possible.

>> CHAIR:  That's excellent, thank you, Baron.  One thing I can report is that Rudolph will actually be in DC, in fact, in the second week of July for some meetings there, and he is going to come up to New York and I will meet him there and we have meetings planned with DESA and with the executive office of the Secretary General to advance various issues including some of the HLPDC issues, but also kind of advance some of the roles and responsibilities with respect to reporting.  So those meetings are on the 10th and 11th of July as well, and, of course, we will report back on them afterward.

Let me move then to the next item.  Not seeing any hands up, so I assume that there are no further questions or additional items either for the Secretariat, the host country or myself.  If there is, please request the floor.  Otherwise we will move to the next Agenda Item.

Okay, not seeing any requests.  So the main session discussion, maybe the first thing I would like to do is to see if a few of the individuals who have worked on updating the main session guidelines want to do an introduction and ask the Secretariat to put the Document up in the window there.  I think if we start with that and we understand the overall requirements of the main sessions then we can move to the individual updates from the various themes.

I'm not sure who is prepared to speak to that, Susan or Sylvia, some of the other folks?

>> SUSAN CHALMERS:  Can somebody hear me?

>> CHAIR:  Yes, I can hear you.

>> SUSAN CHALMERS:  Hi, Lynn, I would be happy to speak to that you like.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you, Susan.

>> SUSAN CHALMERS:  Hello, everybody, this is Susan Chalmers.  I worked together with a group of people who were interested in revising the main session, the main session guidelines from the Berlin meeting, so since we met in June, we have had success within an Ad Hoc Group on how to streamline and make more simple and clear the main session guidelines so I have circulated that Document.

It has received one question from Jutta.  Jutta, thank you for that question.  And so if people have further feedback on the revised main session guidelines, or very burning concerns, it would be good to hear them, but I do think that at this point we have had quite an exhaustive review of these guidelines including input from both Anja and Eleonora with respect to the NRI and the DC communities to ensure that those, certain flexibilities were present in the guidelines for those communities or other groups which the MAG in the future will or may allocate main session spots.

So if folks have had a chance to review, I'm happy to answer any questions, but otherwise at this point I guess we would ask that the guidelines be accepted and used going forward.  Thank you.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you, Susan.  I go like to commend everyone in the Working Group for really basically tightening up the entire Document.  I think the length was cut in half and it's much easier to follow, much more concise now.  It's very helpful.  Are there any comments or questions?  Anja or Eleonora, is there anything you would like to add from the DC or the NRI session planning perspective if Anja says nothing to add.  Let's give Eleonora a minute and see if there are any other questions from any other MAG members.  Eleonora says she is all set will as well.  It's to share learnings and improvements from past years, and one of the most important still is to make sure that they are interactive enough and that they leave enough time for really solid engagement from all of the participants, all of the community.  But if there are any other questions, I'm sure getting closer to the MAG, I would be happy to respond.  So with that then, why don't we move to updates on the individual main sessions.  We had the Working Groups established from those individuals who participated in the breakout sessions at the face to face meeting.  I know some of the groups have asked for help from the Secretariat on setting up mailing lists, not all.  I think some of them preferred to do something a little less formal.

So I'm not exactly sure who is the designated leader for each one of the groups or coleaders.  That would be helpful to really nail down in this call at the same time as we get an update from each one of the sessions.  So as I don't know who is leading the individual sessions, I'm just going to throw the floor open if people could indicate in the chat room which group you are willing to speak on behalf of and we will just work our way through the queue that way.  So who would like to go first?

Ben says he has his hand up for a general question first.  Care, Ben, sorry.  I'm not sure where the hand is up, I didn't see that.  Ben, you have the floor.

>> BEN WALLIS:  I wasn't using the hand up in the WebEx.  I was using the one on the floor request website.  I don't know if we are using that today.

>> CHAIR:  We are using that today and I didn't see it.  So maybe Luis can if troubleshoot that.

>> BEN WALLIS:  First, I did want to very much welcome the progress that's being made already.  For those who are new to the MAG this year, we are far advanced from last year when main session organisation didn't really start until late August.  So I wanted to thank you, Lynn, for enabling us to come away from Berlin with starting points for the main sessions and to keep pushing this forward now at this meeting and over the coming weeks.

So my general point and question, and I put this on the email list last week was I don't think MAG members should be able to be co organizers for more than one main session.  I think the responsibility should be spread out amongst MAG members, but I would like to be able to contribute to the organisation of more than one main session.  Last year there was the opportunity to sign up to mailing lists for each main session.

The Secretariat had created those.  So I don't know whether anyone has objections to MAG members being able to contribute to the organisation in more than one main session, but I wondered if this is something that the Secretariat can help us with.  You asked, you said it would be great if you could establish who would be the co organizers for each of the main session today, but just because we got assigned to a particular group at the meeting in Berlin doesn't necessarily mean we might not want to be a co organizer of a completely different main session.

So if we went ahead already today and assigned those co organizer roles it might not really allow for MAG members to volunteer in other areas.  And once we get to it, I'm happy to be the person who provides a report on the multidisciplinary policy frameworks, main session.  Thank you.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you, Ben.  We will come to your comments in just a moment.  Luis has said that he is troubleshooting some of the various issues we are having here with the WebEx so if people could use the chat room to put their hands up, in the speaking queue request, that would be helpful and we may be having other difficulty with the screen as well.

So let me first, so the first practical question Ben has, I think, is are there any objections to MAG members participating in more than one main session planning group?  We will come to that in a moment.  I think he puts forward, and I think we would probably agree it had been past practice that a MAG member should only be a coleader in one of the main session planning groups, and I think that was probably the    with respect to, you know, how we actually facilitate, I don't know, maybe the easiest thing would be to put mailing lists up for each one of the groups so that people could then indicate if they wanted to be a part of that particular group or not and then, of course, if they wanted to actually be a coleader or facilitator, that would be the place to signal that as well.

If some of those discussions are taking place on just individual distribution lists, it's hard for anybody else to understand what that process is, and how to participate, how to volunteer.  So let me go first, the first question is are there any objections to MAG members participating in more than one main session planning group?

So I see lots of no objections or support for that.  So if there are any objections, this would be the time for somebody to indicate such.  Not seeing any and seeing support for the fact that leaving it    I'm not sure I understand Leon's concept.  No objection to the MAG members participating in multiple main sessions as part of the organising team.  Is somebody trying to take the floor?  Let me go into the participant list and see if I can identify.

If you are not speaking and you are not looking for the floor, if you could put yourself on mute.  That would be helpful.  Okay.  Did that answer all of your questions, Ben?  I guess we still need to figure out what the practical modalities are of those mailing lists.  Does it make sense?  This is maybe a question for the Secretariat as well as the MAG.  I know there were some thought that if we don't use a public mailing list, people are, perhaps, freer to suggest speakers and talk about the pros and cons of different formats of sessions and that sort of thing without it being public.  I guess if people feel that they can certainly do that off list, but I think for the actual organisation of the teams, the most inclusive process would be to allow people 20 do that through individual mailing lists and let the teams from there decide who the coleaders are, co facilitators are and their modalities for moving the main sessions forward.

Would that be a process that everybody could support or better processes, please, jump in.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  I think we can set up the mailing list.  It seems to be a good idea.  Sylvia did make a suggestion to make the mailing list go through because we did have a problem with the mailing list emails being caught by the spam filter.

>> CHAIR:  Hopefully we can fix the spam filter problem.  Let me just try and cover again what I think we have or at least we are leaning towards.  That's at least for the establishment of the Working Groups for the main session planning that the    I was on mute a moment ago or did I just go on mute?

>> BEN WALLIS:  I think we lost half of your sentence.

>> CHAIR:  As I was saying that we would establish a mailing list for each one of the main thematic sessions which would enable people to sign up for those sessions.  Those individuals then can determine their modalities for progressing their work and also determine the choice of the co facilitators or coleaders and Chengetai said he thought that was the best way to proceed as well.  So let's do that.

Ben, if that was all of your questions, let's move to the updates on the current status of the various main session planning.  So who wants to go first?  Ben do you want to go first since yours was the only offer I saw or heard?

>> BEN WALLIS:  Sure.  So in, and I'm not sure if the table can be put up on the screen by the Secretariat, the table that was developed in Berlin.  So I am involved in the group, which is that kind of light brown, the second group down, the possible title is A Multidisciplinary Framework for Policy Making in the Digital Age.

So as you can see from that spreadsheet, the group I worked with during the meeting in Berlin, we came up with a three paragraph description.

The middle paragraph of which was a set of policy questions, so we almost got as far as you asked us to do ahead ever this meeting in terms of coming up with policy questions, a description and a title.  We have done a bit more work or I set up a Google Document and I used the template that people have used in previous years for main sessions, and started to fill things out with other relevant workshops, suggested way of managing the two hours, dividing the topic into kind of firstly a section on what and how a multidiscipline, what O what are multi-disciplinary frameworks and why you would want to have them in place and a second session on how you would go about doing it.

Within this Google Document, I have started to provide some examples and a link to initiatives elsewhere.  So I could just run through those, for example, to give people a sense of the kinds of things this session could talk about.  Maybe at the top of everyone's mind is the high level panel on digital cooperation, recommendation 5B says we support the multi stakeholder systems approach that is adaptive, agile, inclusive and fit for fast changing digital age.

There is a section in G20 ministerial statement on trade and digital economy that was adopted a couple of weeks ago.  It includes a section on governance innovation, agile and flexible policy approaches in the digital economy.  I talked previously about the OECD's going digital integrated policy framework, the idea that that it supports the national digital transformation strategies from a holistic perspective and I have talked in the past of an intersectional Chamber of Commerce from 2017 which set an approach which would take into consideration social policy considerations, technical policy considerations and Government policy considerations.

So we have a general idea for main session, and some particular initiatives from which we could invite representatives to come and talk about those.  But we haven't really had much more discussion within the group.  I circulated this Google Document to the other four people on Thursday, and said I would be happy to present an update today.  But I need to kind of get the views of others in the group, and anybody else who would like to join the organisation at this main session.

So that's about as far as we've got.  I am happy to share the Google Document link or I don't know if that's enough for now.  Lynn, I will pass it back to you in case you have any questions for me or if others do.

>> CHAIR:  I think that's a good update, Ben.  I think you were one of the ones who didn't have a mailing list, although I'm not certain.  So I hope we do get more than just four MAG members on each one of these sessions.  It's a busy period we are coming up with and if we are relying on four people I hope we are able to make enough progress over the next couple of months.

And obviously you can share the Google Docs and things there.  If people want to participate, they could, I guess, join the group as an observer.  We do need people to participate actively and we are going to schedule these reviews for every two weeks.  I think we can get substantive updates in that manner.

I do have one question for the Secretariat before we continue maybe so we can embed that in each one of these discussions.  Chengetai, what do you need information, and what information in order to appropriately populate the schedule?  Are you on mute, Chengetai?

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Can you hear me now?

>> CHAIR:  Yes, yes. 

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Okay.  Great.  For the main sessions, the most important thing is, of course, the definitive title and then the agenda, et cetera.  We can wait a little bit.  So, I mean, we can even wait until October for that.  The most important things were, of course, the workshops, account, with all of those.  But then, of course, you must remember that we need to invite the speakers and everything.  So the earlier it gets done, the better.

We do have a timeline which if Luis can just show it on the screen.  So that is the approximate timeline that we came up with.

So we said 6 September is the final confirmation of panelists and speakers.   

>> CHAIR:  And you would like the title by what date, Chengetai?

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  The earlier the better.  I was hoping that people would be able to finalize the title this week, but, of course, that's not going to happen.  Ben's group does have a definitive title.  So we can wait for two weeks if that's possible.  The first thing we can do is get the title.

>> CHAIR:  I'm sure minor changes would not be an issue as well.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  No, it's just, I mean, we give the title, we publish the schedule on the website, and the host country also needs these titles because it's going to go into the app as well.  And for any other things that we are going to be using to publicize these sessions at the IGF 2019.  So I think the first thing, the title is the most important unfortunately for that.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you, Chengetai.

So I guess, Ben, you do have a fairly definitive title, so that's set.  Let's go to Jutta then.  I don't know if you put your hand up to speak or if you have a comment but feel free to do as you wish with the slot.  It.

>> Thank you for giving me the floor, Jutta speaking before.  I had put my hand up to support what Ben said before and I appreciate that we streamline the process for making on the main sessions, having some deadliness as you already mentioned, so that's fine, and then I volunteered to speak about the main session on data governance although I have now realized that Sylvia has just joined the call, so maybe she can also then add to the main session on data governance because she was leading the debate and taking notes during the session when we met in June in Berlin.

So first of all, we agreed in Berlin to have a title for the session that is already set, and that's Content Governance Rights, Responsibilities, Responses and Risks.  The Google Doc was put on and also we have a mailing list for this group, and people are very reactive to comment on the draft for the session, so I do think we would be able to finish that within a few days.  Then it's, of course, necessary to agree on speakers and everything, but there are already some suggestions for speakers at least for speakers from a certain background, not names yet.

So and with that, having said that, I would like to hand over to Sylvia if she is able to speak.  Of course, I to do think she can add a bit more to this session.  Andrea was also a member of the Working Group.

>> CHAIR:  Okay Jutta.  Sylvia?

>> Hello?  Can you hear me?

>> CHAIR:  Yes, we can.

>> Can you hear me?

>> CHAIR:  Yes, we can.

>> Thank you for giving me the floor and thank you, Jutta for spotting, joining the call late.  It's all good.  It's just 6:00 in the morning here and it wasn't that easy to wake up that early.  Anyway, I think you said it, you know, the progress that we have, we have started to merge the two ideas that were generally proposed and then the text from Roseanne's proposal and the text from my proposal are in that Google Document and then the comments and all of the questions that were discussed in Berlin are also there.

She said she was going to incorporate comments of members of the group as well.  So I will share the link to the mailing list although, well, the mailing list is still on the list of mailing list that is on the website anyway, but I'm going to share the link in a minute on the chat just if anyone else wants to join.  And when you do, I can share the link to the Google Doc.  For some reason, really because we posted the Google Document that day in Berlin, we have had several to modify, they are done by people who don't identify themselves in a way that doesn't reflect the discussion that what happened in Berlin or, you know, comments that are added to the Document that actually answer people.  So unfortunately, I thought that that was the only way to be able to keep the discussion among the people that are participating.

I don't know if other people's groups are experimenting with the same, it doesn't only happen in Berlin, it happened after.  And unfortunately, Google Docs is what we are using, so that's my only report, and I thank you very much to Chengetai for clarifying the deadliness and giving us some additional time to finalize this, and I guess if anyone is from the group, Ari Anna or if they want to update the process, I guess, I don't want to dwell too much on the content because we are still having a lot of discussion but jinx you, Jutta for bringing this to the meeting.  Thank you.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you, Sylvia.  Thank you, Jutta.  Adama or are there any other MAG members in particular that want to comment on this particular main session?  Not seeing or hearing anybody.  I will revert back to the chat.  I think, Natasa, you had offered to give an update on one of the main sessions.  We can't hear you.

Someone is playing music.  So, Adama, no, we can't hear you.  Why don't you try again though.  Natasa, we couldn't hear you either.  I'll ask Luis to troubleshoot that in the background.  Adama, something about your mic.  Natasa, why don't you try once more and we will see if we can get it.

>> NATASA GLAVOR:  Hello, everyone.  So concerning the main session, I a suggestion potentially named Artificial Intelligence challenges to data governance.  On our last face to face meeting in Berlin, it was a small group of colleagues who had worked in integration process for this main session.  It was Selina and myself.  We are at the very beginning.  We still do not have a mailing list, so we are very thankful to Secretariat for setting one soon.

Regarding this main session preparation process, I contacted colleagues from the for rum on Internet of Things, Big Data and AI, and I got very prompt answer from Titi, Martin, Alex, who are willing to participate, and I'm very grateful for that.

So our small group will respond and empowered as well and that will be great.  So that would be more or less all from my side.  So if some of my colleagues would like to add something, please do.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you, Natasa.  Let me see if there is anybody else that wanted to come in on that.  Mary, I'm hoping that the transcript helps you to follow even if the voice isn't so clear.  Anybody else who wants to come in?  I think Natasa made a really important point that to me was evident, but one of the things the MAG has wanted to do was to ensure that there was better integration across all of the various components in the IGF ecosystem, so across dynamic coalitions, across any Best Practice Forums across DC and NRI activities, you know, in concert coming in with the workshop and then making session plannings.  To me that means that we should be inviting individuals from those groups and beyond to participate in the main session organising teams.

So the main session should be led by MAG members and hopefully co facilitator co led by MAG members so that we get the benefit of the full MAG, but that the participation in the organising groups themselves is open to beyond MAG members.  And specifically I think it's helpful to specifically reach out to other parties, other activities and get their specific participation.

Adama has put a note in the chat room saying basically July and Sylvia elaborated.  This is to the previous main session report.  So I want to thank Adama for hanging in there and trying to speak.  Hopefully we can actually get the mic problem sorted out soon.  I saw a hand up from Miguel candy to speak at another one of the sessions.  Miguel, you have the floor.  There doesn't seem to be follow up questions to Natasa.  Miguel?  Miguel, you have the floor.  Are you muted?  We can't, Miguel.   

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  I have a mute button on my headphones, so I sometimes leave it on and touch the screen so sometimes that mixes me up.   

>> CHAIR:  We will give it another second, Miguel, and if not we will move to somebody else and come back to you in a few moments.  Luis is so helpful.  I'm sure he is in the background trying to help.  I think Miguel's if was the last hand I saw up so maybe I can ask Anja to speak to the NRI sessions and Sylvia to speak of the DC preparations as well wheel we work to get Miguel back on.

>> Hi, Lynn, and everyone I hope you can hear me.

>> CHAIR:  Very well, thank you, Anja.

>> I will update on the status of preparation of the NRI sessions including the main session and the collaborative session.  In the list of input documents there is also a link to a Google dock we are preparing and there you will see that kind of finalized, I think, to a good extent the aspects that the session will be addressing.  On Wednesday this week we are having a call and NRIs are most welcome to join.  We will be discussing the format of the main session which I think is probably the biggest challenge for all of the NRIs.  Specifically we will be raising the question whether all NRIs should be speaking and how should we do an interactive discussion between the co organizers, and I also hope our discussion will reach the point where we will discuss also who could be the moderators, because I think this session is very broad.  It can require a good and experienced moderator.  So in that sense, the think the NRIs it will come in with a few names and interested MAG members that would like to join that session to contribute and advise the NRIs would be very much welcome.

I think, Miguel, we can hear you and I will be done in two minutes so you can take the floor.

>> Miguel Candia:  Let me know if you can hear me.  I will be quiet.

>> We can hear you, Miguel.  I hope you can hear me.  With that, I said the call is on Wednesday, so I'm hoping we will have a full proposal then by the end of this week ready.  Now, the MAG has a link to the Google Doc and you can follow the progress we are updating continuously the Google Doc.

For the collaborative sessions, as soon as we are done with the main session with these finalization of the main elements, we will then be moving to the collaborative sessions.  For now the general overview of all proposals is available on the IGF website, just under, if you go on the front page, you will see it says NRI session next to all other sessions, and I think it's going to be a busy summer for the NRI so you know that we announced it is going to be mostly case study oriented sessions and we are hoping that for all of the sessions including the main session and six collaborative sessions, we will be calling for case studies and developing written input documents to the sessions that hopefully could be of use for the wider community.  So we are starting that work hopefully very soon in July.  And, of course, there is the coordination session that's still pending it's time we will start working on the agenda as soon as we are done working on the main session and collaborative session.

We do have an internal timeline.  Honestly with this huge group that is expanding just in the last three weeks, we have recognized three more initiatives that are very active, and so that takes time to brief those colleagues to join the work.  So I don't know whether we will be able to respect the timeline, but for now we are hoping that by the end of this month we will be having fully finalize the main session proposal with inputs for in the case studies and I think August will be finalize case session so in Autumn, we will have finishing up with those proposal.  I think that would be all from me, but if you have any questions, I would be happy to respond.

And, of course, some of the NRI colleagues are on this call if they want to cover something that I missed, please, I would be thankful.  Thank you, Lynn.

>> CHAIR:  I will open the floor to any other NRI members in a moment.  I know you have shared this with the MAG before, but could you tell us again what the proposed title is for the main session.

>> ANJA GENGO: Yes, of course, the proposed title for now, but it's still not a final version is Emerging Technologies and Their Interfaces with Inclusion, Security and Human Rights.  I will place the link in the chat.  I do think you see the proposal. 

>> CHAIR:  Thank you.  Are there any other comments from any of the individuals helping to organize that session?  And Jutta, I see you have your hand up.  I don't know if that's an old hand or a current hand?

>> JUTTA CROLL:  Thank you, Lynn.  That was a hand volunteering to talk about the DC's main session, but I do think Miguel Candia has managed to make him heard so he is able to go first, I think.

>> CHAIR:  We will come to him then again.  Are there any other questions for the NRI main session, activities?  Again, they are looking actively to work with the MAG on the development of this session, so people should read the Google Doc and the proposal there and participate appropriately.  I will count to six.  Let's see, anybody coming in yet?  We will go to Miguel.  Miguel, you have the floor.  I'm glad we managed to sort out the problems with your Mike.

>> MIGUEL CANDIA:  Thank you very much, Lynn.  Can you hear me now?

>> CHAIR:  Perfect, perfect.

>> MIGUEL CANDIA:  Excellent.  I'm sorry for the technological misunderstanding before, its Miguel Candia, and we were numbered group six and we were working on the proposed main session on SDGs.  That has a proposed name of Achieving the SDGs in the Digital Age.  We don't have a list, a mailing list yet, but I think very much the Secretariat in order to set it up.  I think it would be of use for MAG members and others two would like to help and to cooperate with the work of the this main session.  We don't have a list, but we went back and forth with the other members of the group.  You can see they are listed.

And we were particularly talking on the importance and relevance of the main session of this main session in particular in order to give it a proper standing in the case that we decide to go through with it.  As far as we understand it, we see it as very important, and we want to push it forward.

But, of course, particularly I would like to emphasize here that Paul had a view on it, and I would like for him to give his point of view if he wishes to.  Having said that, we are in the beginning stages of the, of formulating the list of questions and others, and the other issues that we need to find out, I'm sorry, to set up, and we are    I am in favor of what Paul said, of having a little bit more time to appoint or, you know, decide on the co organizers, particularly after setting up the mailing list so we can have some views and maybe volunteers to do so.

I think that would be all from me, and I would like to invite all of the members of the group to add some more information if they think it is necessary.  Thank you, Lynn.  That's all for me.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you, Miguel.  Paul, Paul Rowney, do you want to add something.  I know you said you don't think you have a good connection there, but.

>> PAUL ROWNEY:  I'm at DOA Airport, and I have a very bad connection.

>> CHAIR:  We can hear you fairly well.

>> PAUL ROWNEY:  I don't have anything to add to what Miguel has said.  We have started suggestions and I think we are building forward.  Miguel is going to be taking a bit of the lead there.  I did have a thought that I wanted to post about the main sessions, and we have some of the main sessions in parallel rather than as a vertical stream.  I just wanted to put that thought forward that maybe two or three of the main sessions could happen at the same time so we are not putting people away from all of the workshops   

>> CHAIR:  That's a very interesting thought, Paul, thank you.  Let me see if the Secretariat has any thoughts on that or the MAG members.  Any other thought?   

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  You can hear me, right?

>> CHAIR:  We can hear you, yes.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  I'm sorry, I have to make sure.

Yes, for the main sessions being at the same time would be a little bit difficult since all of the main sessions have interpretation, and at the moment, we only have one team, one room that can, have interpretation.  If we have it all, if we have two or three, we will need three teams to do that.

So unfortunately this time we cannot, if we want the main sessions to have interpretation.  If you think that main sessions don't require interpretation, then we can rethink it, but then the other, if it's, if they happen at the same time, then we would have to displace some of the sessions.  So I don't think the way    I'm sorry, I'm thinking as I'm going along.  Unfortunately, I don't think the way the schedule is structured at the moment it can happen, but we can keep it in reserve for next year when we plan the schedule to see how that goes.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you, Chengetai.  Any follow up from Paul or any other MAG members?  Not seeing any.  I think at this late stage ensuring that we would have both enough funds and resources and room and equipment for parallel sessions is probably a fairly big lift.  We can continue to think about it, but I think we probably need to go forward on the assumption that they are in sequence, not in parallel.

Jutta, you have the floor for an update on DCs.  And thank you, Paul.  Thank you.

>> JUTTA CROLL:  Thank you, Lynn, for giving me the floor to speak as the Co Chair for the dynamic coalition session.

We have had a call which was very well attended I do think by nearly all of the dynamic coalitions last Wednesday discussing how the dynamic coalition's main session could be structured and dynamic coalition representatives were very grateful for having the opportunity again to have a 90 minute session and to have it as a main session together.  The group was very concerned with the idea that the session should be well structured, follow or thematic thread that DCs can easily adapt to, and they are all in agreement that it should not be a mere presentation of 17DCs' work in a row, but putting it together around a theme.

So the suggestion that was agreed on was that each of the dynamic coalition picks on one of the Sustainable Development Goals that is, their work is strongly related to.  And first dynamic coalitions could demonstrate within that session how together they hope to achieve the SDGs.  So this was kind of the attempt to bring together the previously discussed idea of the dynamic coalitions as a network of networks, and on the other hand having a more topical approach.

And the idea on working again on the SDGs with the dynamic coalitions could bring somehow these two ideas together.  Then the dynamic coalitions agreed that they would have very short template in advance of the session that would help to structure the session on the one hand, but also help the moderator to go through the work of all of the dynamic coalitions, and this template would address the answer why the dynamic coalition, the specific dynamic coalition had chosen a certain sustainable development goal.

Then what at the time dynamic coalition had already achieved in regard of that SDG, and what their plans were towards 2025 in regard of that specific SDG.  Then also during the session, we agreed that, of course, dynamic coalitions should also formulate policy questions in regard of the SDG they had chosen and the work they were doing so that template should be prepared shortly after the minutes from our last call were finalized, and then the template shall be circulated on the dynamic coalition session filled in so that we somehow have a planned work over the next summer months and some people will be on vacation towards September whether I do think the session will be set.

I learned from this call now that probably we need to agree as soon as possible on a title for the session.  That was not yet done, but I do think we also discussed that the session should be somehow it's related to the session that Miguel had just described, the main session on the SDGs, but it would approach the SDGs from a different angle with take special purpose to make clear that dynamic coalitions are doing intersessional work throughout the year to achieve the SDGs.  And so somehow that will be mirrored in the title as well and maybe Eleonora is also on the call, she was with us with Markus and me on the DC's call and if you have anything to add, please, Eleonora, feel free to do so right now.  Thank you.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you, Jutta, let me see if Markus or Eleonora have anything to add.  Eleonora?  Eleonora if you have anything else to add, just come in or request the floor and I don't see Markus on the call.

>> Hi Lynn, can you hear me it.

>> CHAIR:  We can hear you now.

>> Thank you Lynn and Jutta.  I didn't have anything to add.  Sorry for the long pause, I was having some connection issues.   

>> CHAIR:  That's fine, thank you.  Are there any other comments from MAG members on the dynamic coalition organized main session?  Slow count to six.

I guess I have a couple of comments.  As has been said by Jutta, and I think we need to make sure, of course, that there is no overlap or redundancy between the two main sessions.  That's one point.  And I suspect we will pay quite good attention to that.  I just have another reflection, Jutta, and I hope it's not off base.  I mean.  I think we need to invoke the DC and in fact in the NRI sessions as well, make sure these are sessions organized with the interests of those groups in mind, but the main sessions are not supposed to be showcases specifically for the work and it's a fine line.  It's actually meant to help advance the work and it's actually meant to engage the full community and be of interest to the full community.  And I think we also need to be careful, and, again, I hope these comments aren't off base.  It's a little bit hard to tell from just the brief description here, that we are not trying to force fit the dynamic coalition work by tying them to the SDGs because we think that's of interest.

If a DC is not actively focused on advancing an SDGs and if they don't if intend to continue that work going forward we need to be thoughtful about applying something that may or may not be true looking backward and may or may not be true looking forward if I can say that fairly directly.

I just hope we are really, if you will, working to advance topics that are in line with the overall thematic objectives of the IGF, obviously bringing all of the talent and expertise the DCs have to bear on this particular topic and not just trying to find something to sort of force fit both the showcase for them and, you know, the obviously very, very topical and very, very important SDGs. 

>> JUTTA CROLL:  Hi, Lynn, if I may respond to that directly.  You may remember that last year the dynamic coalitions were also working on the SDGs, but that was more broader approach with going, having that bridge somehow where dynamic coalitions try to fit in the work they are doing.  What we learned from that exercise was that the work of all dynamic coalitions is related to the SDGs so there is not that we force fitted the work into something that is not fit for purpose.

But on the other hand, we thought it might be useful to go more into detail and to pick one specific Sustainable Development Goal, and that, I do think, Eleonora, correct me if I'm wrong, that we had nearly all dynamic coalitions on the call last week.  And everybody agreed that, of course, their work is somehow part of the efforts to achieve Sustainable Development goals.  On the other hand, with relation to the session we had last year, the main session for all of the dynamic coalitions, somehow dynamic coalitions felt that the opportunity that especially main session provides to make their work more visible was not used enough in last year's session.

That's why we came up with that approach that it's necessary besides the individual dynamic coalition single section that each of the dynamic coalition will have in the program that we follow that idea that dynamic coalitions somehow do joint effort in regard of Internet Governance and the SDGs.  That's why we came up with that idea.  Thank you.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you, Jutta.  Appreciate the additional comments, and I'll see if there are any other comments from MAG members or if there are other representatives of the DCs on the call.  Okay, not seeing any requests, we still have, I mean, I think the titles are changing a little bit from the titles that were captured in the meeting in Berlin, but by my count, we are still missing updates, we have an update on the HLPDC and the frontier issues.

I don't know if there are anybody that is prepared to comment on that.  This is one of the items we will be working in New York in two weeks' time, but Chengetai, is there anything you want to add or?  We haven't really had   

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Yes, let's wait until we have the meeting in New York and then we can come back and comment.

>> CHAIR:  Okay.  And then I think there is probably one more session, but I'm not sure if it was human rights or cybersecurity and Internet of Things because the titles have moved, but there should be one more report.  Can the Secretariat help me figure out which one?  Is there a separate one on human rights or was that combined with the content and governance rights, et cetera?

So by my count we are missing one or two.  There are nine main sessions and we have covered seven.  So there are two main sessions missing.  Can the Secretariat help identify?  We did multidisciplinary Internet Governance.  Digital governance and digital trade?  Cybersecurity, was that another one?  We have done the SDGs.

So we can't just kind of combine them and we can combine them obviously, but that means we free up a slot which we then should be working to populate.  So, Chengetai or Eleonora, can you help me understand whether or not we are looking at seven or nine sessions?  At the Berlin meeting we were looking at nine.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Yes, so let us go through the groups.  We have done group one and group two we have done.  Luis, just go down a bit.  Group three, is the digital governance and digital trade.  Have we done that one?

>> CHAIR:  I don't think so.  Is there anybody on the call who was a member of that breakout group?  I think Ben is looking for the floor.  And we will come to you in a moment, Ben, let's see if we can identify what we are scrolling.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Nobody is there because we had Mary Ann, Kenta.

>> CHAIR:  Let's reach out to them, set up a mailing list but also ask them to send just as soon as they can an update to the MAG list.


>> CHAIR:  And which one is that for, the data governance?

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Oh, sorry.  Go to three again, Luis.

>> CHAIR:  Let me go to Ben, maybe Ben can shed light on this and if you could just keep looking in the background, Chengetai, it would be appreciated.  Thank you.  Ben, you have the floor.   

>> BEN WALLIS:  I'm not sure I can shed much light on this.  I do think we were missing digital trade there, but you have identified that now.  I asked for the floor.  It might be two early, but I wondered if the Secretariat had anything to report about a potential main session on    how is it described in the table, HLPDC/frontier issues.

I don't think you need to populate every main session.  If that drops out, I think that's fine.  But I wondered if the Secretariat had any news possibly from other parts of the U.N. about what they might want to do at a session.  And I mentioned I'm conscious that in the multidisciplinary framework section I'm suggesting that we take into account one of the recommendations coming out of the HLPDC report.  So, yes, if there is time today, or maybe at the next meeting, it would be great to hear from the Secretariat about that high level panel on frontier main session.  Thank you.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you, Ben.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  We just mentioned the session just now.  Maybe it was a bit too quick.  Lynn and I said that we will wait until after next week because next week Lynn and DESA and also the it EOSG are going to meet and there is going to be a discussion on that.  So then we can update you in the next virtual meeting on that session.

>> BEN WALLIS:  Great.  Apologies for not paying attention.

>> CHAIR:  I think there have been multiple very clear signals from the executive office of the Secretary General that they would like a session and kind of a bus consultation during the IGF.  DESA has also supported that session as well, so I believe there will be such a session.  The German Government as well as is very interested in having a session.  I think it's understanding what that would be, what would be most appropriate and most helpful to everyone.  So I think what you are doing in the session you mentioned earlier, Ben, is a particular slice of it, and very helpful, but I don't think it will negate the need as seen by multiple parties for this other session.

But having said that, so we are missing digital trade and digital governance, and I think we are still missing another one, and I don't know when Natasa reported on which was previously called cybersecurity and Internet of Things or whether or not we are missing the human rights, which I did not hear a specific discussion on human rights which was the title from our minutes.  Any more indication from the Secretariat on what we are missing there?  So not trying to put anybody on the spot here maybe we could offline, Chengetai, if we can go back through the table from our face to face meeting, compare that with the report we have just had here and maybe reach out to those individuals that were part of the breakout groups to if get updates on the two we are missing.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Yes, because human rights is in group one if I'm not mistaken, but we will go through again just to make sure.  Yes, human rights is in group one.  So I think you have covered them all actually.

>> CHAIR:  If you could put together the list of the current titles as they stand one through nine, I think that will help us as we move forward as well.  Okay.  So it was Jutta who actually reported then on that set of, that set of issues.  Policy framework.  I still feel like I'm missing one but let's leave that and we will follow up offline.

Any final comments or questions from the Secretariat or MAG members on the main session planning?

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Not from the Secretariat.

>> CHAIR:  I don't see anything from the MAG members.

The next Agenda Item is a discussion on the thematic introductory and wrap up sessions.  We had come to an agreement on in the face to face MAG meeting was that those introductory sessions would be a combination of perhaps a short introduction to a MAG member talking about kind of the narrative and the focus of this particular track, maybe a broader introductory session with either a visionary speaker or even a high level panel.  I think the German Government might be interested in finding room for some of the V.I.P. speakers in some of these panels as well.  I know they are getting a really good response rate from everyone they are reaching out to, and, of course, it would be good to, one, hear from them and engage them.

And the third thing we were going to try and do there, I think, was also kind of draw out some kind of main topics or main areas that we hope would be pursued through the week and the workshop sessions and that would then set up the wrap up sessions as well.  What we actually need at the moment is a process to populate and get those three thematic introductory sessions done, and the wrap up sessions.

The wrap-up sessions we might be able to handle on the ad hoc Working Group on reporting if there wasn't a better mechanism to do that.  We had suggested in the face to face meeting that perhaps those thematic Working Groups that reviewed the workshop submissions and recommended the specific tracks to the full MAG would be the ones that would be best placed to drive the minimum introductory sessions, but not clear to me that we actually closed on that or had agreement in the MAG.

So I think the decision that's open for us here on this call is how do we want to proceed with organising those introductory sessions.  So while people are thinking on that, I will go to Carlos who has asked for the floor.  Carlos, you have the floor.

>> CARLOS:  Can you hear me.

>> CHAIR:  Yes, we can.

>> Carlos:  I'm sorry, it was taking a lot of time to find the spreadsheet with the groups and the main sessions I found here, and I remember that on our group on digital trade and digital governance we had a session from changing the possible title.  I couldn't find any discussion on this after the Berlin meeting so I don't know if Alani, Mary or Jutta have any suggestion.  It looks to me quite well put the way it is, the alternative and the thematic description, I think, sounds good as well.  But I wonder if we go for the alternative title.

>> CHAIR:  I think that's a good question to put to the developing Working Group for the main session.

>> Carlos:  Yes, for sure.

>> CHAIR:  I think    I agree that the descriptions were very interesting, and I think that further should take place during the main session.  Thank you.  Would someone like the floor?

>> SUSAN CHALMERS:  Hi, Lynn, this is Susan.  So just quickly since I was working on the introductory and wrap-up sessions with Kumaya and Maria in Berlin, I am happy to revisit and reinteract and then circulate a draft Document, a draft suggestion Document for that introductory session, either tomorrow, well, this week, just not on Wednesday or Thursday because we have a holiday here.

>> CHAIR:  That would be excellent, Susan.

>> SUSAN CHALMERS:  And as folks want to join in, I will, I will reach out to the folks who were previously engaged, but as anybody else wants to join in the discussion, then please just send me an email.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you.  That was really helpful.  Thank you for reminding us of that as well.

It's amazing how quickly your mind can go in just three weeks.  But there was some really good work and good suggestions and suggestions, so I think revisiting that and getting that back out would be very helpful.  Any further thoughts or questions on the introductory and wrap-up sessions?

Just a heads up that we will be looking for MAG members to subscribe to that particular set of work as well.  Okay, just doing another slow count to six if we have no more thoughts or questions on that.

The next item was item 6, suggestion on ad hoc Working Group on reporting.  I put a call out for participants.  I'm nearly ready to send out a draft for a poll for the first meeting.  Again, this was really focused on, there were a series of documents and a process that was in place for some years but with every year we look to it from improvements was just to revisit those steps that actually start with the workshop submission process and then continue through as the workshop preparations advance with various levels of reports sort of immediately ahead and immediately after and all of that supports the Chair's summary.

We had additional ideas that said maybe we could even do in addition to the traditional Chair summary a thematic report which would bring in certainly the main sessions, that will bring in any kind of questions or input or any outputs from the high level leaders meeting as well, of course, any of the DC, NRI or BPF activities, but that we might actually be able to build kind of a more substantive track for each one of the three main thematic tracks which would just require additional scoping and probably additional support.  So all of this is meant to really pull kind of best ideas from the MAG and the community with respect to the sort of reporting we can pull out of our existing set of activities and processes.

And then, of course, it will actually serve to provide responsibility and direction to all of those individuals that are actually participating in the delivery of the various reports whether you are a workshop organizer, Rapporteur or moderator or whether you are some of the additional consultants or resources that will be brought in to facilitate the reporting process.  It so that's the work we are about to kick off.  We will put a few paragraphs to that and to the call for a doodle meeting time, and we will get that set up and kicked off in the next week or, in which case I will need, I'm sure Eleonora has this record already but the current set of documents we used last year for last year's process if we could bundle those together and easily, easy place to find them, easy.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  I think they are at the bottom of this Document, at the bottom.

>> CHAIR:  That's good.  We will include that in the work of the ad hoc reporting group as well.  Let me see if there are further comments or questions on that.  We had a lot of interest from the if MAG members as well, so I want to thank everybody, and I think this is one of the important pieces of work also.  There is so much work that takes place during the IGF and as part of the IGF process ensuring that we are doing everything we can to ensure that it's reported out as useful as possible is important.

Not seeing any other requests for the floor, any other comments?  Move to sum 7, which is updates from the various Working Groups.  We have four Working Groups that have constituted the workshop review and preparation outreach and engagement, Working Group on improvements and Working Group on fundraising.  Let me see if there is a volunteer to go first.

>> JUNE PARRIS:  This is June Parris I will report on two groups.  The first one will be outreach and engagement.  We have had a meeting on, we had a meeting a few days ago on Skype.  We were supposed to meet in Berlin, but we didn't meet.  It we did, however, keep in touch and we have been keeping in touch ever since then.  We made modifications to our charter and have since then developed a roadmap.

This will be presented to the Secretariat before Berlin in November.  Although we meet on Skype, we will consider changing our meeting place to Zoom at our next meeting since this is being done by the entire MAG and MAG meetings.  Our roadmap looks like this.  We have got a section for action, activity.  And this is where we actually say what we are going to do, and then we have got a timeline.  Then our next section is lead, who is going to lead.  So some of us have volunteered to lead these sessions within the timelines.

And then we have mentioned in the next section resources needed, which we have made a list of those, and then the final thing would be to request to the Secretariat.  Myself and Rose, we worked on the roadmap with the sort of overlooked by Arsene.  Arsene is not on the call, he sent an email to the MAG so you can have a look.  We are still looking for volunteers and we want you to have a look at the roadmap that he sent today in an email.  That's all for outreach and engagement.

The next one is improvements.  I believe I'm the only one on the kale at the moment.  Shenai has had to leave the call, she sent me a message.  We met on Thursday.  Our agenda, we agreed and we reviewed documents, Flavio and Julian were able to join us and give us some sort of guidance.  We are planning future work for the group and inviting the SIG community to the Working Group.  We have plans to Berlin in that we want to the meet there and we want to obtain a bilateral room so that we can meet and exchange our work with other groups.

This group has been going on for a couple of years and we thought we could finish and round out and do everything by November, but it's not possible.  So we are looking at a deadline for Poland next year 2020 where we can finish this work.  So we agreed that we will meet in Berlin, look for a bilateral room and continue to work on the charter and follow recommendations done by the previous group, the previous Chair.

Since this work is so important to MAG, we are also reaching out to other groups in MAG, such as outreach and engagement, and we want to have a concrete deadline.  As I said before, we are going to consider the deadline for IGF Poland in 2020, and that's all for the two groups.  Thank you.  

>> CHAIR:  Thank you, June.  Are there any questions or comments for June on those two Working Groups?  Not seeing any or hearing any.  Let me see, Jutta, are you the individual that would speak on behalf of the Working Group on workshop review and prep?

>> JUTTA CROLL:  Of course, Lynn, thank you for giving me the floor.

I just have to admit that we don't have any updates at this stage, to the Working Group did not meet after we finalized somehow this assessment of the work proposals and so the next step would be to convene the group for another meeting in the process.  Thank you.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you Jutta.  I know in the MAG meeting there was discussion of whether or not we would consider to doing a couple of surveys, particularly for those individual that's took the time to submit the proposals to ask them, you know, basically what they think of the process where it could be improved, and that sort of thing, do you think there is time to develop that survey or.  I don't know if that's something the Secretariat could resource.

If we are going to do that, it's obviously better that we do it before too much time has passed.

>> JUTTA CROLL:  Of course, Lynn, that's right.  We discussed that in Berlin, but the group did not take it up so for.  I do think everybody was very busy in the last weeks, but I'm not sure whether it's the survey needs to go out directly after people have received their response to the workshop proposal either accepted or rejected, whether that could also be done later on in the, when we continue moving forward to this year's IGF.

I'm not sure what other MAG members think about that or what your thoughts are when this survey needs to be done.  Any input would be welcome, and then I can easily convene the Working Group again and hopefully try to find a way how to achieve that very short survey and then send it out.

>> CHAIR:  I appreciate all of the work you and the Working Group members did in this particular process and all of the work you are continuing to do.  It goes above and beyond even the, kind of the main session organising, because a lot of the individuals are also engaged in helping to advance other parts of the process, so very, very much appreciate all of the work and understand the workload as well.

I think there are pros and cons to doing it now and doing it later on both of them.  Are there any particular views from MAG members?  Otherwise, we will leave it to the Working Group, I think, to take up at your next meeting.  Let's see if there are any other reflections from MAG members.  I see a comment from Dalsie and Neme in the room.  It was just to understand from the proposer's point of view what they thought about the process and are there particular areas of improvement, are there things they found particularly valuable, that sort of thing.  We tend to look closely at MAG members' views to the pros and many MAG members have in the past participated in the process, so participated in the process and have experience themselves, but I think there is nothing like looking to the proposers to ask how it felt, what could be more helpful.  That was the main purpose.

Not seeing any other kind of requests for the floor, I think Jutta, we will leave it to the Working Group then appreciating the workload that's on top of everybody, particularly over the next couple of months, and leave it to you for your discussion and judgment.

>> JUTTA CROLL:  Yes, thank you, Lynn.  I do think we will pick that up within our next meeting and as you said before, there are pros and cons.  Some people might be a bit disappointed now that they got the information that they will not be in the program, so they might be reluctant to answer to a survey.  In addition to being rejected on the other hand, it's also summer break.  So maybe it's easier when the program is set up when everybody can have a look at the whole program seeing what workshops have been accepted and better understanding may be why their workshop was rejected that we then send out the survey and try to reach out to as many people as possible.

I will bring that forward to the Working Group.  Thank you.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you.  I'm sure your deliberations will be very thoughtful as well so I'm very happy to leave it there.  Thank you, Jutta.  That leaves the Working Group on fundraising.  And really the only activity that's happened there over the last few weeks or months is ongoing discussions with Rudolf and Daniela with respect to what kind of fundraising activities we might drive in the background of the IGF, specifically through the high level leaders meeting, whether would be an appropriate, appropriate activity?  I mean at one point we were sort of thinking maybe asking for pledges and that sort of thing but we need frankly a lot more discussion on that.

The German Government is trying to advance that and testing that thought out with various Governments, but there is nothing concrete yet.  That's probably got the biggest chance of payoff.  A lot of individual requests, and they are in fact doing fundraising activities now when they speak when they are meet with different Governments and reach out to different Governments for support and they are finding some reluctance to contribute to the trust fund and we are not entirely sure why, so we need to spend a little more time to understand that if it's just that people are, you know, anything from the kind of over predominance of Europe over the last few years in terms of supporting the IGF is some of the comments.

I think the HLPDC report and it coming out was giving some people a little pause for thought as well.  So we are going to continue to advance and find one or two kind of major activities we can proceed on and at the same time hoping that, you know, over the next couple of weeks we can pick up some of the individual organisation fundraising activity, which we had pretty much kind of set up last year ready for launch and teeing it up, and I think we just need to put more effort into that.  That's something I hope to be able to do over the next couple of months in particularly now that the IGF 2019 preps are settling in.

Let me see if there are any comments, questions, additions to that report from anyone?  We also need to reconstitute formally the Working Group.  Most of the folks that have participated last year have expressed interest in continuing but we should put out a formal call for them as well.  I will take that action item.

So I think not seeing any requests for the floor, that brings us to the end of the agenda with respect to AOB.  If I can ask the Secretariat to just comment on when our next few meetings are scheduled or what they are thinking about vis a vis a schedule over the next few months.  And it pops up like magic in the chat room.  Thank you.

So there is another call scheduled for the 10th of July and one the 24th of July so we are looking at our nearly 2 week schedule.  This was a little bit out of cycle because it should have been held last week, but given the closeness to the Berlin face to face meeting and various other meetings the previous two weeks it was pushed to now.  And I don't know if we have any meetings scheduled for August or not.  We will get on the 10th of July and see how we are doing.  Sylvia, you have the floor.

>> Sylvia:  Just a couple of questions, we are preparing the general registers are preparing the publications that they normally distribute at their booth at the IGF.  And as in Berlin it was mentioned that the local host was pushing for a paperless IGF that has created quite a few questions internally from our coms departments to see what that means and to what extent that is.  So I was wondering if it would be possible to get some guidelines about that as soon as possible, because it takes a month to produce those publications.  We have sent email to Rudolf already, but we haven't receives a response, and then the other question also on specific logistics for Berlin was that some of the women from Asia are traveling or hoping to be there with their little babies, and they need some help to identify what options are near the Convention Center or at the Convention Center for baby sitting or child minding, whatever the word is.

So if there is any contact in Berlin that we can get them in contact with, of course, they are not expecting to have any child services provided at the IGF by the local host, just for clarification.  They just need to find out how to get them if that would be possible to connect with someone at the local host that can answer some of those very local questions about Berlin, it would be really, really appreciated.  Thank you.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  I will see if Berndt wants to say anything first and then I will comment afterward.

Hello?  For the IGF village, the plan is to be as paperless as possible.  As we mentioned before, we are going to have these    it slips my mind, those things that you can scan and then you can go to a website and then you can download the documents.  So we are trying to discourage people coming in with lots of pamphlets, et cetera, QR codes, thank you.

So we are trying to discourage people coming in with lots of pamphlets.  And, of course, you will also have TV screens where you can plug in your USB drive and play Power Point presentations or short films, et cetera.  We are going to send out detailed instructions once we finalize everything with the host country management team to those people with their boots to tell you exactly how this will work.

We will push them again.  Unfortunately, just Rudolph is on vacation at the moment and he is going to come back soon but we can follow it up as well since we are in contact with the management team.  As for the question of childcare, we will ask that question and see if, you know, some services or some phone numbers or websites can be provided where people can where people can book for childcare.  It might be worth it putting that as a question on the registration just to see how many and what ages, and maybe, you know, something can be arranged that would work for a small group.

So, I mean, that's one thing to think about.  Thank you for bringing that up.  Yes.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you, Chengetai. Sylvia, we also put a follow up question in the chat room which is is there going to be a delegates bag and should people be planning for that? 

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  A very good question, Sylvia, as well, we will get back to you on that.  We will try to do it this week.  Anja, maybe she has got something I might have missed.

>> ANJA GENGO: No, Chengetai, I think you covered it.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Sylvia, we will get back to you even if we don't have an answer I will get back to you and tell you we don't have an answer but we will get back to you.

>> CHAIR:  Paperless, bagless.  Veni, you have the floor.

>> VENI MARKOVSKI:  First of all, I wanted to say thanks to the people that put so much effort into preparing all of these documents and this is such a great job.  Thank you very much.  Secondly, I don't remember if I shared that when I was, when we were in Berlin, but we did go to the.  If you are not Veni speaking could you mute your mic.  Make the Secretariat can move the other open Mike.

>> VENI MARKOVSKI:  I don't remember if I shared that but I did go to the venue, and I urged people to book hotel at the venue.  It is very nice.  I did look at some of the rooms and it's worth staying there and being part of it, because it's really a good facility, and also with regards to somebody was mentioning whether they have rooms or something, it's a very huge Convention Center, and I expect that we will have all of the rooms that we need for the IGF, so it's really, I'm hopeful that this will be an IGF to serve as an example for the next one to come.  So just an observation some might visit there.  Thanks.

>> CHAIR:  Thank you, Veni.  June put a note in saying it's quite expensive as well, so obviously a number of considerations, but luckily there is a really vast range in Berlin, and the public transport is excellent as well, so if.

Any other items for AOB or any final items from the Secretariat or Baron from the German Government?

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  None from the Secretariat.

>> CHAIR:  If I can just thank everybody quickly again for all of the work.  I know it's been very, very big lift here the last few months with the workshop proposals, and now with main sessions and, of course, we are up against summer in the northern hemisphere so that's another factor as well.  So I want to thank everybody for all of the effort.  There are only two types of UN conferences successful and very successful and I think the way this is going this will be a very successful effort.

So thank you all.  Thank you everybody who joined very early and very late, and we will talk to you again in just under two weeks' time.  Thank you.  Thank you, Chengetai.  Thank you everyone, and the Secretariat.  Bye bye.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Thank you very much, Lynn, and bye, everybody.  Thank you.