IGF 2020 - MAG - Virtual Meeting - XVI

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:  So welcome to MAG Virtual Meeting Number 16, a short virtual meeting, one hour instead of the two hours, and as usual the meeting is being recorded.  There will be a summary report, and there is transcript.  Am I right, Luis?  Let's just say there is, yes.

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  There is a transcription, I see our captioner is online.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Great, great.  I think we have    I can only    I think Gunela said she couldn't make it, and...

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  Sylvia and Jutta.  Thanks very much Chengetai.  Anriette, Human Rights Council to the MAG members.  As Chengetai said, this meeting will be short and it's just to make sure we are all on track with organising main sessions.  So thanks for all of the effort that people have put in.  There really has been progress.  So on that note, let's start with the reports.

And Luis, if you are able to display the reports when they are presented or if the presenter could do that, that would be helpful, but it's not essential.  So on that note, can we start with data?  Please can we get an update?  By the way, if you have a report that you presented last week, it would still be helpful for us to get an update, if you have made any progress.  So can we start with data, please?

>> NATASA GLAVOR: Yes, we can.  Natasa speaking.

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  Thanks very much, Natasa.  Go ahead.

>> NATASA GLAVOR:  So we finally managed to fill in partially the main session template for data main session.  Unfortunately, it's not filled in completely, but we definitely made progress, so I hope we will be, it will be ready and completed soon.  So the title, I sent it to, I don't know if you can see it    yes, you can.  Okay.

So the title of this main session on data is the data practices during the COVID 19 pandemic.  It's 90 minutes long, and it's associated with program themes data, and environment.

It's something that in our Google Docs template, so I'm not quite sure who it is going to be at the end really connected and associated with environmental problem theme, but it's something that now when this document is working for all of us, it's, I think, okay, to be here.

We wanted to concentrate on, on whether the data practices and discussions on data practices changed because of the pandemic or during pandemic.  So we think that it will be interesting to see by data practices we mean data collection story and analyzing usage and so on.  So we think it would be valuable to see whether some change is present.  And in doing that, we would like to prepare this main session along with colleagues from the best practice forum on data and new technologies.

And they already prepared something.  It's currently public call for case studies and data practices that hopefully will be on time to see results on our main session.  But no matter on whether it will be over by then or not, we would like to work along with the colleagues from perspectives forum, and I think it would be good correlation to have similar topics and ideas presented in this main session on data.  

Policy questions are how COVID 19 has affected data practices.  Has COVID 19 changed the way user data are collected, analyzed and used?  Has it made people share data in different way? What types of principles, parameters and safeguards should be applied to protect privacy and has the discussion of the balance between data privacy and data protection changed because of the pandemic?

The session agenda would be, would start with ten minutes introduction and setting the scene.  I have to admit that I borrowed an agenda from the main session on trust, because I think it was great.  So Jennifer and colleagues who did it, I apologize, but I think it's really works for us as well.  So after the introduction of setting the scene for ten minutes, we would have 15 minutes for first policy questions and round table reactions.  And after that, during that first 15 minutes, first poll will be launched, and after that second policy question round table reaction for 15 minutes and second question or the questions second poll will be launched, and then third policy question round table reactions, and then at the end before the concluding remarks, we will have reactions from panel from poll one and poll two and all of those interactions and questions and answers for 25 minutes, and then concluding part which will last for ten minutes.  

Unfortunately, we do not still have a Chairs and Moderators, nor Speakers, nor Rapporteurs, people who participated, but I'm not quite sure whether I forgot someone, so I apologize if I did.  But I would like to thank Jennifer, June, Mary, Titi, Wym, and others.  And plan for participant engagements and interaction would be using audience questions pool.  Provided from our platform that we will use for Conferencing.

And one of the desired results and output would be lessons learned on what worked and what didn't based on collection of data practices during COVID 19 pandemic, and here are various sources on that helped us prepare this template, like Microsoft blog on preserving privacy while addressing COVID 19 and ITU joint webinars on digital cooperation during COVID 19 and beyond.  And we see our main session on data associated with SDGs, number 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 17.  That would be all from my side.

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  Thanks very much, Nat tax sha.  Does anyone else have anything to add, anyone that worked with Natasa in preparing the outline?  Does anyone have any questions or comments or suggestions for the data group?  I'm on a phone, so I'm not going to just check the speaking queue, so please feel free to jump in.

Hello, Natasa.  It's Jennifer reminding me that Ben also provided good input into the data main session proposal, so just, I will update the template to include him as well.  Thank you, Jen.

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  Thanks, Natasa.  And also thanks to Ben for being helpful.  Natasa, I don't see any comments or hands.  Secretariat, please tell me if there are hands.  But, Natasa, if no one has questions, what do you need most from fellow MAG members?  Do you need more people?  Are you happy with the group?  Do you need more volunteers or not?  And what would you most want help with at this point?

>> NATASA GLAVOR: I said that our mailing list today that I can present our results.  I mean, main session template on today's meeting, but I'm not quite sure whether I will be able to involve more in this main session, so definitely we would need more engagement from colleagues that indicated that main session on data is something they would like to take part in.  So if it's possible to engage more, that would be great.

Otherwise, I'm pretty concerned about the future of our main session.

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  Thanks, Natasha.  Yes, I share your concern because I think you have made fantastic progress, but you do need, you need more people to support the process.  And I would say that what we should look at now, if MAG members can look at this outline, send suggestions for speakers, and any other comments, but I think it looks interesting.  It's really topical.

I think maybe one thing to think about is whether it overlaps with any of the other COVID sessions, but I think that can all be refined.  Speakers, obviously, that's important to begin to identify.  So if I can ask MAG members to begin to suggest names of speakers.  On that note, is there anyone in the speaking queue?  I see it's empty.

>> TIMEA SUTO: This is Timea, can you hear me.  I'm sorry, I always lose where to find the speaking queue.  So I use the Zoom function and I'm sorry you can't see me today.  I will find the link to the speaking queue.  Basically, I wanted to congratulate the group on the progress made from last time to this one.  I think you made tremendous progress.  And I think it was also Ben who suggested this at some point the group, I think it's worth taking into account once you start thinking about speakers.   

There was a webinar organized earlier this year by USG team and ITU on Data Responses to COVID.  I think that was the title.  It was one of the parts of the webinar series that Fabrizio's office put forward this year.  There were quite a few good speakers in that webinar.  You might want to check as an integration.

I know also that European Data Protection supervisor had quite a few ideas and discussions around data in terms of COVID as well as the OCD had a number of discussions on this topic.  So I think there are quite a few previous discussions, papers, and influential speakers who would add, from this group, who would add to the session.  And I'm happy to make linkages with those if you need me to.

And, of course, I'm volunteering here and to all of the other main sessions, if you need speakers from the business community, I'm happy to reach out within my network, especially if you have already a profile in mind.

>> Thanks Timea, that would be helpful, and I agree, Jennifer just posted in chat that   

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  Thanks a lot for that, Timea.  Those are really good suggestions.  I think many Developing Countries also have data Commissioners ... I'm sorry, my connection is really bad.  I had to move.  Go ahead.  Who is speaking?

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  We were just saying that we lost you.

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  Can you hear me clearly now, Chengetai? 

>> We can hear you, well, Anriette.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Yes, we can.  I'm going where is the mute button? 

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN:  Sorry.  So thanks and congratulations on the progress.  And let's all send in suggestions so that we can have your proposal populated with speakers, and let's aim for that by early next week.  So next group, environment.  Timea, do you have any updated?

>> TIMEA SUTO:  There is the unmute button, yes, sorry.  Very short update from what we shared last time.  I just want to report that we are discussing things both on the mailing list and we also have a Skype chat thanks to June who said that up, so if you are only on one or would like to be added to the other let us know and we will make sure that you get all of the information.

In terms of the main session on environment, we agreed with the group that Afi, June and I will act as co facilitators to make sure there is somebody who has an eye on this.  We received quite helpful contributions from Dalsie and Sylvia, and Lucien also was part of the first discussion around these themes, so we are getting quite a good group together.  And we have quite a bit of interest from non MAG members as well to participate in the session planning.

Lydia from the Swiss Government in her capacity as a host country is interested in joining us, and I have had a quick discussion with David Jensen from UNEP.  You suggested we reach out to UNEP last time, but they found us quicker than we found them and they are interested in being part of the session.  So this is just on the team who is currently working on this.

And about the description, we haven't change today from last time, members seem to be in agreement around the focus of this session, so this is quite a broad discussion around how the digital industry can reduce its own carbon footprint, how can it act as a catalyst to other industries to mobilize around climate action, and then thirdly, how digital technologies can lead to monitor and mitigate climate change.

So that is the general focus of the session.  We are, we will need to have a meeting very soon and see how we deal with speakers.  We have quite a few suggestions, so we will need to discuss who to adjust to make sure that we have quite a balanced session and we can go deep into the discussions.

And also to select our moderators.  We are well set on the volunteer side for online moderators and Rapporteurs, Dalsie, June, Afi, they are all volunteering and I'm volunteering myself as well if it's needed to make sure that the online discussion is well moderated and all of the messages are well captured.

So that's where we stand right now.  If any of my colleagues have anything to add, please do so.  And if you would like to join us in the preparation of this session, please don't hesitate.

>> JUNE PARRIS:  This is June Parris.  I'm going along with everything that Timea said.  I want to remind members, if you are not getting the emails, can you let us know?  Or chat with the Skype group.  That's another means of keeping communication.  That's all for now.  Thank you.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  I don't know if Anriette is still with us?

>> I don't think so.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  I will just continue until she has rejoined us.  So I suppose with the environment group, you don't need any external help as such at the moment.  As you know, the Secretariat is always here, but if you need any other help, please reach out if you need something.

>> Thank you Chengetai, and thank you for the so far.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Should we go to the next one, which I would think would be, well, let's skip digital cooperation, because I think Anriette would want to be on that one as well.  So let's just go to the next one, which is inclusion.

>> ROBERTO MASANGO:  Hello, Chengetai.


>> ROBERTO ZAMBRANA:  Thank you very much.  Yes, since our last call, actually we tried to work with all of the suggestions that came to our document.  We have active participation come in besides, of course, Karim and Paul and I., we have an active participation from Ben Wallis, Timea Suto, Mary Uduma and June Parris.  They were all kind to place their discussions, so based on that we made some adjustments.  We have an upgrade, of course, in the date because we already know that it's going to be on November the 10th and it's going to be by the 7:00 in the morning.

And we also discussed about the speakers and we are still working on them.  There are several other proposals for some other speakers that we would add perhaps making some adjustments to the one that we propose add the beginning.  And we also didn't have the reports yet.  That's something that we also need to discuss with the group and hopefully we will have during this following days we will have volunteers to help with this.

I think that's so much, as I said.  We already have a lot of material work before, so I think that's pretty much in my sight, but I would like if Karim or maybe Paul will add to some other comments.  Thank you, Chengetai.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Thank you, Roberto.

>> Hello, everyone, I'm on the road, but I'm connected, I'm hearing what Roberto said, and I'm okay.  I don't have anything to add.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Thank you very much, Karim.  Anybody else in the group?

>> CARLOS AFFONSO:  Yes, Chengetai.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Please, Carlos.

>> CARLOS AFFONSO:  I thank you, Roberto, for the summary.  I was unable to participate in your, in the last meetings on inclusion, but you have some suggestion regarding participants or speakers.  In Paris we had great participation from people of the Liberal Router project, which is a major achievement regarding having full access to hardware infrastructure.  And they were at the time with the project, and now they have the full router operational and ready to be distributed for community networks.  It's a major achievement.

And I think that someone from Liberal Router that participated in Paris or somewhere else could be part of the speakers in the Digital Inclusion covering this aspect covering the aspect of infrastructure for Digital Inclusion.  It would be really great. 

>> If I may, thank you very much, Carlos.  I will write it down and, of course, we could further discuss in the group.  But I am writing your suggestion.  Thank you very much, Carlos.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  If you need any help getting in contact with the group, the Secretariat can help you out.  And if you need any help with getting somebody from the ITU, for instance, Doreen or somebody, we could also reach out to them and ask you.

And also, remember if there is anything from the New York side you would like to get in touch with, I mean, Wyman and Dennis will always be very willing to inquire for you as well.  So just keep that in mind when you look at your panelists.  This goes for all of the groups as well.  You are not doing this alone.  I mean, we are here to support as well.  Thank you very much.  Just one more thing.  Perhaps we could, we have some answers from some of the proposed panelists like Vint Cerf and Sonia Jorge who were willing to participate, but for some others and the new ones that were proposed it would be great if you could help us.  

So if we have a new call, I think we are going to have a new call with the group, and finish the names, and then we would like you to check the names and perhaps to contact them on behalf of us, that would be great.  Thank you.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Okay.  Thank you.  Any other questions?  If not, we will move to the next group.  None.  Okay.  So the next group now is going to be digital cooperation.  Hanna, are you there?


>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Great.  You have the floor.

>> HANA ALHASHIMI:  Thank you very much, colleagues, thank you so much and special thanks to our team.  So I am co facilitator the work towards this main session together with Concettina as well as Adama, and with a very active group that's ever growing so thanks to all for being involved and I don't want to miss anyone, so I'm not going to name everyone by name.

So this session started off with the title of the Secretary General's Roadmap on Digital Cooperation.  Of course, many of you will remember that there was a main session on this process last year as well.  And this year we really wanted to use the opportunity to look at the amount of work that's happened, and that includes a series of extensive consultations and active involvement of many members of the MAG, but also the community within and beyond the IGF on this question of digital cooperation.

So we have suggested an amendment to the title to focus on global digital cooperation broadly, and also to focus on the part of the roadmap that is, perhaps, most relevant to our work, which covers recommendations 5AB on this digital cooperation architecture's question.

But not for it to be kind of an open ended conversation, but for it to be very targeted.  We have suggested perhaps even including a subtitle to reflect that this could be a space for members of the community and beyond to even make pledges towards, you know, the IGF and its role architectures on disability cooperation and other things that I will go into detail.  So we have put forward the proposed date, the length.

In terms of themes, we felt it was cross cutting and, therefore, we have kept them all there.  In terms of the overview, we have put a little bit of history so that there is a reference made to the roadmap itself as well as to the options paper that covers recommendations 5A B.  The context of the pandemic, but also, you know, really urging participants to perhaps read that work in advance and come with a view to two main things.

Number one is making pledges, and number two is working towards an implementation plan.  So instead of an open ended question of how can we improve the IGF or what models or how could models work?  Perhaps inviting speakers that can speak directly to, you know, what they are doing to support the IGF or how they would like to maybe move towards implementation of many of the suggestions made in the options paper or what they are doing on many of the things including questions of inclusion, questions of, you know, stronger outcomes, questions of linkages with other fora, questions of frameworks and architectures.

So this would be a space for that kind of pledging exercise as well as, perhaps, a bit of ideation on how to work towards implementation.  And with that, we have put in a suggestion from ISOC to not focus solely on the IGF as the operations paper does, but to elevate the discussion somewhat to frameworks and models in order to allow for linkages with two other pieces of work.  So that includes the MAG Chair's webinar series on frameworks or cooperation and it also includes perhaps the work of the strategy group that many members here today are also active on.

So we are looking at ways to do that so that it's not purely an IGF planning discussion, perhaps, but it looks into the real global digital cooperation.  In terms of policy questions, they are structured largely along the options paper with a view to moving beyond it.  So as you know, the options paper is not a negotiated document.  It has no formal standing.  It just has a summary of suggestions on the way forward.

So the idea here is to go beyond that into how this could actually work.  So it asks really of speakers and participants questions on inclusion and broader participation, what specifically you could do.  So if you are taking the mic, what do you plan to do and how could this work in practice?  It also puts in the help desk and observatory question there specifically, but with a view to adding value for participation or supporting, perhaps, new participation.

On accelerated cooperation, it puts forward the question of, again, what specifically you could do.  So this is kind of what we mean by pledges, you know, to overcome silos, to bridge gaps with other fora or perhaps strengthen linkages and how to better foster cooperation.

The suggestion here is perhaps for that to be a question that's targeted less on maybe what the IGF is designed to do, and more on maybe models generally if there is an appetite to do that and if the level of speakers requires a broader conversation, but open to feedback on that.  In terms ever outcomes, similar approach, and the linkages to decision making bodies, Luis, if you don't mind scrolling up I'm being maybe a bit slow, but we are still there.  Thank you.

That brings me to the next question on high level engagement, some linkages to decision making bodies, but linkages to decision makers as well.  So there is questions on parliamentarians, but also the question on the high level leadership group or the high level board.  There was a few comments on basically the need to go into details of how this would work in practice, and perhaps this could be a place where that conversation can be continued because the options paper does not go into detail on that.

And finally, the question of communications and finance.  So instead of just saying there needs to be better communications and financing, this would be a great space for, for example, something similar to the U.K.'s contribution to the website to be announced.

So it provides a space for that.  So moving down in that case, the structure thus far, and we are still working on specificities, but we would suggest given the central role of the Undersecretary General that Fabrizio Hochschild acts as Chair, he is best suited to introduce the topic as well as go into the details, suggested that perhaps those involved in the drafting of the options paper could serve as moderators as they understand the discussion.  So that's myself, and we haven't asked Rudolf formally, but if he is on the call, thanks buddy.  

There are speakers because of the background there may be a chance to include the countries that are active.  Sierra Leone's activation manager supported the group to join.  We looked at pledges to target speakers that would be able to speak to some of the activations that we would like to invite.  And so we would, the reason we don't have specific speakers is we would need to do a little bit of lobbying to see who would come with something concrete or an announcable or who might be interested in an announcable.

In addition to some speakers that we felt would add great value from different stakeholder groups but this is a group, a list that's still growing.  Unfortunately there were a lot more suggestions made in the discussion, anonymous, I don't know if you are copying everything to send somewhere, but this has been emailed to everyone and we are very much welcoming comments.  In terms of Rapporteurs, we are grateful to MAG members for volunteering, June and Adama.  In terms of participation and interaction, you know, as mentioned before, these documents that are already existing, and this might be something that's a bit different in this session from other main sessions.

There are actually documents in a discussion that's been happening for the last couple of years.  And so we would hope that participants and particularly speakers read them in advance and come with something a little bit more concrete as well as linking to different processes including the strategic groups.  In terms of results and outputs we mentioned before pledges and the implementation plan and then in terms of Annex documents and sources we mentioned these documents already.  In terms of the SDGs, partnerships essentially to name just one.  So thank you all very much.  I'm very open to comments and suggestions.

It's very much a work in progress.  And in terms of encouraging perhaps big stakeholders or small, getting a balance between representation, but also maybe commitments and pledges would be very helpful and we would rely very much on the network of the MAG to contact anyone that's, that you think would be able to come with an announcable, perhaps, so that we can have a lively and exciting session.  Thank you very much.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Thank you very much, Hana, that looks good and is very detailed.

>> HANA ALHASHIMI:  If my co facilitators would like to add anything.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Sure, yes, yes.

>> JENNIFER CHUNG:  Thank you, nothing from my side.

>> Same here, Hana, you did a good job.  Nothing from my side either.

>> HANA ALHASHIMI:  Thank you.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Okay.  Great.  Do we have, I think I see one hand up from Jennifer.

>> JENNIFER CHUNG:  Thanks Chengetai and thank you Hana and colleagues for the comprehensive summary on the roadmap session.  I just had a question about the pledges.  Can we get    I'm not quite understanding what the pledge would be in this context.  I don't know, Hana, if you could complain a little bit more about that?

>> HANA ALHASHIMI:  Sure, absolutely.  As we discussed in our internal group, this is a proposal for it not just to be a theoretical discussion about, you know, what could help for global cooperation, but for participants to really come and say what they are doing, what they would like to do, and to maybe encourage more support both for the IGF and for global cooperation.  So the example that I gave of the United Kingdom's dose nation for the website.  That is something that is concrete and actionable, and that kind of level of support would be very, very helpful, but if there is a network that's, would be on something that, you know, ISOC was talking about an initiative of a network that supports, you know, policy makers with ensuring that their policies can also support network infrastructure, for example, you know, that's the kind of things that an active thing that can inspire, perhaps, greater cooperation.

So I think these would be kind of the examples we are looking to.  But, you know, a few people were on the call, so, please, also jump in on what you think would be a helpful contribution that can maybe be announced in this session.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Thank you.  Do we have any more questions?  Going once, twice.  It seems not.  Thank you very much!  That was great.  Have we done them all?  Trust.  Who is the co facilitator for trust?

>> JENNIFER CHUNG:  Chengetai I can do the summary again for the trust main session group.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Thank you, Jennifer.

>> JENNIFER CHUNG:  Lucien who is on the call today and Jutta who gave apologies, we are the co facilitators for the session.  I will drop the link in the chat.  I have sent two versions to the list.  There is the clean version, which is currently on the screen, and this is the life version with comments.  So a quick update from the update we gave last time, we, the co facilitators of the trust main session did have a call with Paul Fehlinger from the Internet and Jurisdiction Policy Network, because the topic of the main session here is closely aligned with their work that they do in the policy network.

So it was good to get some feedback and ideas from him as well.  In section 5, actually, we didn't change too much of what we presented last time, so Luis, maybe if you could move down a little more.  So in the policy questions area, we are still keeping three main clusters.

The first cluster is talking about Internet fragmentation and the network of networks.  The second one is about digital sovereignty, and the third one ties a little bit of disinformation and fragmentation information there.  So what we did change was for digital sovereignty since we understand it is a, it is a, not a well-defined concept right now, people are taking it and using it in the way they use it, we thought it would be very important, and especially we had this input from Sylvia that there is definitions or at least definitions would be discussed so people can understand from what context we are talking about this.

And one thing that was suggested was to include interdependencies, digital interdependencies and digital cooperation into this conversation instead of just going straight into the digital sovereignty which can be a little jarring from the whole, from the whole conversation.

So that is what is new in this, in this part.  A little lower, please, Luis.  And in the    a little bit back up, yes, this is good.  So we also got some very good input from Ben regarding the last cluster.  Originally we had this formulated in the backdrop of current global events like the pandemic, like elections that may be coming up, that are coming up or that have happened.

But he suggested that we should probably widen the scope of this cluster to look at the role of Governments, international organisations, I guess intergovernmental organisations and other stakeholders in responding to this, because this year is unprecedented in many ways for everybody.  So that is    there is some text that has changed there, which is, which widens the scope of this cluster.  I think that is actually very beneficial to the entire conversation.

Moving on a little lower, the session agenda hasn't changed from the previous, the previous update.  If we can go a little lower to show the speakers and the Chairs.  For the moderators, we are still looking to have either Bertrand or, of course, Paul from the Internet and Jurisdiction Policy Network.  We think that they would be able to guide and frame the conversation that the panelists and speakers can contribute to in a very well rounded manner.  Also pointing back to the email that Luis and Sylvia sent to main session groups, in that we would probably update the proposal with the different roles we need to play including online moderation because everything will be virtual now.

So if we get some clarity on the number of people or the number of roles we need to fill for this, I can definitely update this proposal.  If we can move lower for the speakers.  Currently we have three that are appearing on the chart, but this doesn't mean this is the only three we have.

These are the speakers we had discussions from the trust group and from others, and two invitations have gone out.  One to Stefan Schnorr who is the Head of Digital and Innovation Policy of the German Government, and the second invitation is out to Alissa Cooper who is the Chair of the IETF.  So they come from Government and the technical community respectively.

We are also looking at the other stakeholder groups and other regional groups as well.  So this is an another plea to the MAG members, I think Anriette was asking each group to ask, you know, what we need from the MAG members.  This is what we will need.  We will need speaker recommendations especially for this topic.  There are some that have been discussed but haven't gone to the stage of being invited yet so they don't appear on the chart, so if we get suggestions from the different regions, the different stakeholders, this session will be a lot more well-rounded.

So I think the other parts of the proposal has remained unchanged.  Oh, yes, it has changed.  The outputs and desired results.

So hearkening back to what Anriette mentioned, we are trying to tie the discussion in this main session to something that moves forward to feeding into intersessional work, be it BPFs, DCs or even MAG Working Groups, hopefully being an input to the roadmap for digital cooperation.  I still need to understand more about the mechanics of this, but the previous MAG call we had Jason, I believe, from Fabrizio's office mentioning that there are still recommendation groups and round tables still being discussed.  

And hopefully, there will be some way that this conversation can feed into some process that can help look forward to that as well, because, you know, the goal of all of this is the strengthening and evolving of the IGF.

So I think I can stop there.  Everything else has remained pretty much the same.  I'm happy to take any questions from colleagues.  And also, yes, Lucien, if I missed anything, please jump in and add.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Lucien, do you have anything to add?  While we are waiting for him to find the mute button.  You said something very interesting.  Jason is on the call now, so I'm just going to suggest to him that if he thinks it's useful for any of the groups that are still active to have a speaker or so on any of these panels, I mean, he could suggest that and I think is that would be one good way of linking the two.  

>> Yes, definitely, no, I appreciate that, and we would be happy to help.  So you can just send me a message for the individual session and what you are looking for and we will relay it to the corresponding recommendation group and then they can come back with any recommendations for speakers.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  All right.  Thanks, Jason.  

Lucien, I suspect you don't have anything to add?  Are there any other questions from other MAG members?  Or any other additions from other members of the group?  Well, I guess not.  Thank you very much for all of the co facilitators for presenting.  I think it's very useful that we know where everybody is as we can see most of the groups are on good footing.  There is just one or two that need some help, and we will try and help them as much as we can with that and with the organisation.

I think there was Paul who wanted to say something?  Paul?

>> PAUL ROWNEY:  Yes, you are talking to me, Paul Rowney?  Yes, stuck in lockdown, but any way.  I wanted to quickly, we have captured the comments on the introductory and concluding sessions, and I just sent out a short PPT on the general findings, but just in a summary, the general consensus is for a pre recorded introductory session, and that this should be a short, concise introductory recording so that people do take the time to actually look at it.

So the general thoughts if we go to the second slide is just keep it short, keep it snappy.  We will have very short introductions from each of the thematic groups.  It would be probably several videos weaved into each other.

We are trying to keep each intervention down to around about three minutes.  We don't want it to be long.  We don't want to repeat things that are going to be shared throughout the IGF.

So one short introduction which just talks about, you know, this is the 2020 IGF, et cetera thematic group.  This one, this is the one that is inclusion.  This the is purpose of the inclusion track, this is what we are trying to achieve.  This is the narrative and this is the type of workshops that will happen.

The idea is to also have the BPFs to do a short introduction about what the BPFs are and what they are trying to cover, the DCs and the NRIs, and then a short closing message.  So if we look at slide 3.  This is really what we are trying to achieve.  Just go down.

I'm sorry, go up to slide 3.  The general thought is just to have somebody that is concise, dynamic, snappy, promotes the program.  We are not trying to promote the IGF as is done elsewhere, but promote what is happening on the program with link to other resources.  So if people want more information, they will be able to get that from the recording for from the download.

So a short, snappy, no more than 30 minutes, pre recorded introductory session to the different streams that the MAG is involved in, which are the thematic, the DCs, the BPFs, and the IGF.  That gives us a holistic view of the different program tracks.  When we look at the concluding session, there are some arguments for a concluding session in general with everything that's going on and the looseness of the program being virtual, the general sense is that we are not really going to get out of our concluding.  It doesn't make sense to have a recorded concluding session, and trying to pull people together after an exhaustive program to come to a live concluding session probably wouldn't work.

So the general feeling with the virtual IGF as it is is not to have a concluding, to change the format of the introductory to being a more inclusive introductory pre recorded session to the different themes.  So I just wanted to introduce this and this was the key takeaways that we took away from last week's discussion and other discussions that have happened in the last week.  So there we go.  I'm putting it there for comment or for people to think about.  Thank you.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Thank you very much, Paul.  Take some responses now, and if you don't want to respond now, you can always respond online as well on the email because, Paul, you sent this out to the group, right?

>> PAUL ROWNEY:  Yes, I sent it out.  And we would need the Secretariat's help doing the prerecording and getting the videos together and snipping them together into something that becomes seamless and makes sense.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Sure, that's what we are here for.  Yes, we will help out, yes.  Roberto.

>> ROBERTO ZAMBRANA:  Thank you very much, Chengetai.

Thank you very much, Paul, for the presentation.  I think it's a good approach about the concluding sessions, I feel that, of course, in a face to face meeting there is a good chance that most of, I mean, many people would be able to assist this concluding session and it will be great for receiving some feedback and perhaps an approach to some conclusions.

Overall, the whole track.  And I think that's why feeling that, perhaps, we are not going to receive this kind of participation in an online meeting, that would be the reason Hawaii it wouldn't be advisable to use the concluding session if I understood well.  If it goes like this, and there is not going to be a concluding session, that is something that will be good to at least to have some sort of a relation would be to include at the end of each of our panels.  I'm not sure if Luis already thought about it or the Secretariat thought about it, that perhaps using the tool that we have in Zoom perhaps to have a quick feedback with a generalized normalized format in order to have at least one of the inputs about this evaluation aspect.  That could be good.  Thank you very much.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Thank you, Roberto.

>> PAUL ROWNEY:  If I can respond to that quickly, Roberto, you are correct.  Being virtual, we don't expect much participation, and in the closing session, there would be a wrap up, really, of each of the themes if we follow a similar theme to last year in the closeout session or the closeout, yes, session, I guess.

So, yes.  You are correct.  Thank you.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Thank you.  Just to Paul, we are not going to have that summary in the closing session of this year.  That    we haven't planned for that this year.  So for the closing, I think it's going to be in, I mean, of course there is going to be summaries, the Chairman's summary and the other outputs that the Secretariat is going to be producing.  And we are still in the process of finalizing exactly what those outputs are, because we do want to make a slight change and make them better from last year.

And as far as having a survey at the end of each session, I think, yes, that's a good idea.  And I think in fact Luis is working on something, so there will be, like one of those things that we used with Anriette, I think, a couple of MAG meetings ago during the June MAG meeting, yes.

>> PAUL ROWNEY:  That makes sense.  Thank you.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  It is 5:00, and I do like to keep time, but, I'm sorry, it is an hour, because, of course, you all are in several places.  So we have gone an hour.  Is there any other business or any other questions before we close?  I will give it the six count.

>> ROBERTO ZAMBRANA:  Perhaps a question if I may.  When the group should be preparing or trying to finish the final proposal?  Do we have a deadline for this?

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Yes.  We would like that, of course, as soon as possible, but it does help to have a hard physical deadline.  Let me just consult with the Chair and we will give you a deadline.  Next week we would suppose that you do have, I mean, some groups already have that, but you would have contacted your panelists, all of your panelists to see whether or not they will be able to make it.

So I think that's, that could be a good aim for our next MAG meeting.  But for a hard deadline, yes, we will communicate that to you.

>> ROBERTO ZAMBRANA:  Thank you very much.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Thanks.  And I will give it another six count to see if there is anybody else who wants to say anything.  Okay.  All right.  Thank you very much for attending.  We will have another MAG meeting next week, and we will be following the rotations, so next week's MAG meeting on Tuesday is going to be at 2000 hours UTC.  Is that correct, people who are better in time than I am?  Luis?

>> I think that's correct, Chengetai.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Great.  Thank you.  All right.  Thank you all.  And we will be contacting you, the Secretariat and also Anriette will be contacting those groups who need help.  So we will keep in touch.  Thanks.