You are here

2019 IGF - MAG - Virtual Meeting - XVIII

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: Good afternoon, morning and evening, ladies and gentlemen, this is MAG meeting number 18.  And before we start, just the usual that this meeting is being recorded and also transcribed.  There is going to be a report. Also we will be using the speaking queue and the link is being posted into the chat.  With that, I will hand the meeting over to Lynn to start.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Chengetai.  Hello, everyone.  This is probably our last or penultimate meeting before the IGF itself as it's getting quite close now.  We have quite a full agenda.  I'll move for adoption of the agenda in just a moment.  But I think we are looking mainly for high level updates, basically any sort of requests for additional support, additional speakers, anything that is needed to actually progress any of the sessions here or open business.  So with that, I'd like to move for adoption of the agenda.  I'll do my slow count to 6 to see if there are any requests for additions or changes or any requests for any other business.  Not seeing any requests for the floor, I'll call the agenda approved.
And move to the first item of business, which is Chair's introduction and welcome most of which I've just covered now.  I think the real intent here is not to go through substantive updates for everyone of the agenda items because frankly, there is not enough time for that.  And most of the activities are well advanced, if not complete.  Really we are looking for any substantive updates or specifically any requests for additional support or help, if people could focus on that as we go through the agenda, that would be helpful.  We will go to an update from the Secretariat next, and then a update from the Host Country, looks as if participants at the moment to see if someone is on, if not Chengetai and I do have the materials we can use to provide an update.
With that, Chengetai, we will move to the update from the Secretariat.  You have the floor.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Lynn.  From the Secretariat, a reminder, the pre session reports are due on October 28, that means for all sessions, including the main sessions, you have to fill in the form for the pre session reports.  Then if you could all also kindly add your descriptions in the sched platform and this is due on the first of November, and you don't need to worry, if you have updates after the first of November, you can always go back into the sched and update it, so it is updateable.  And then MAG members who apply for travel support, you will be informed shortly, hopefully this week, that, you know, for the usual details that we ask you, ask of you, and so those E mails will go out this weekend.  You don't have to worry.  Everybody who applied got the travel support.
Also for the pre session reports, we do have for reporting, we do have webinar or slash help desk, which is going to take place on, at 1:00 p.m. on the 17th of October, and this is 1:00 p.m. UTC, on the 17th of October, and it's going to be run by the Secretariat, and you don't need to worry, we will be sending out E mails to remind everybody about all this.  And for registration, currently I think we have got over 2800 approved registrations, but still it's a reminder, please anybody who still has not registered, please do register because it does take some time for the visa to be processed at the German consulates, I think they are, or embassies.  So please do it well before time and in case you also, if you have any problems, it does take us time to help.  So please do that, as soon as possible, if you have not registered yet.  I think that is all from the Secretariat.  Let in have a quick ask of the other members, if I forgot anything.  Luis, Anja?  Lina.
>> LUIS BOBO: Thank you, Chengetai. Maybe remote hubs?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Remote hubs, we currently have 34 remote hubs, there are still two weeks left for registration, and there is going to be a webinar as well for remote hub leaders.  Those E mails will go out as well.  I think that's it.  Thank you very much.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Chengetai.  Nebojsa has asked for the floor, it is probably in response to your report, Chengetai.  Stay available.  Nebojsa, you have the floor.  Nebojsa?  Nebojsa, we can't hear you.
>> Can you hear me.
  (very faint audio) 
>> There is nothing coming from his microphone, I'll try to help as usual.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Luis will help you in the background, Nebojsa and we will come to you after the next update if that is okay.  The next update is from the Host Country.  I do see Rudolf on the call, thank you for coming in.  I know it has been very very busy.
>> A little bit busy.  (chuckles).
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: You have the floor.
>> Thank you so much, Lynn.  Hi to everyone.  Yeah, actually, it's true that we are now feeling the pressure of the IGF approaching, but it's positive and good pressure, not at all negative.  We are looking forward to it.  So, I don't know what I, should I tell you more than you already know, perhaps it is important for you to know that on day one, after the opening ceremony, we have planned three panels as, in the same like setting as we had in Paris, there was two around the three issues, future of Internet Governance, inclusion/SDGs, and Internet Governance and the third one on SMEs and Internet Governance.  We are at the moment trying to contact people, high ranking knowledgeable people who could serve on these panels, as participants or moderators.  And we think that these panels could somehow complete a little bit and give some input into the IGF of what has already been decided by the MAG, and also what will have been then the discussion on Day Zero.  For the parliamentarians, that is also something where people normally ask a little bit about because it's a new aspect, there we have on Day Zero, there is a session kind of welcoming session for the parliamentarians.  They will be welcomed by a member of our Parliament, he is at the same time the envoy of our Ministry.  He is one of the persons that are behind the German application for the IGF.  He has been around for quite some time in the IGF.  That is I think a good match.
Then we are working together with (indecipherable) eagerly to prepare the parliamentarians.  We will have, we had actually yesterday a workshop at the interparliamentarian union, we will have workshops in the German, perhaps also in others, we are working with the parliamentarians asking them which are the issues that you are most interested in, which are workshops that you could perhaps participate in or just attend, or other formats, and then all this will culminate on day 4 in the main session, where it is planned to have after short opening our parliamentary State Secretary Mr. Hilter, a discussion amongst parliamentarians to have the input from the IGF.  It is now foreseen that the parliamentarians take part in the whole IGF exercise, and then we would like to assign Rapporteurs or people who could brief the others about certain issues or aspects, and then to give them the opportunity to reflect upon this and perhaps have something like parliamentarians' input or something like that of one pager for them.  The parliamentarians are eager to have a dedicated slot in order to hand over the parliamentarians' responsibility from the German Host Country to the Polish parliamentarians, will be hopefully in office by then.  Then of course we will have the official handing over at the end ceremony late in the day but that was very important for parliamentarians to have which exchange with the next parliamentarian with the Host Country parliamentarians, in order to give this dimension a little more sustainability, not to leave it a one time event.  Perhaps if there are any questions, I can add whatever you want to know.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you very much, Rudolf.  Let me just see if there are any questions for Rudolf and then once we are through with that Nebojsa, I'll come back to you because I'm assuming it's on the Secretariat update.  The floor is open for any further questions for Rudolf.  Slow count to 6, not seeing any.
>> Great.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Rudolf, thank you very much.  I'm not sure if you are able to stay on for the entire call or not, but really appreciate your being here and the update.  Chengetai and I did have a discussion yesterday on the closing sessions, which somewhat mirror of course the opening where there is a formal closing, and then there is kind of what we call a community session.  If you are not going to be on the call, perhaps we can talk to that just in a moment.
>> Yeah, I will try to stay on the call, but I can't guarantee that I will be there all the time, because my phone is ringing.  But I wanted to, I mean as much as possible follow the discussion, yes.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Excellent.  Thank you.  I'll go to Nebojsa then to see what his comments are, and then maybe we can make one small adjustment to the agenda and discuss the current thinking around the closing sessions now, to make sure we have you on the call as well.  Nebojsa, I understand you have audio now?  You have the floor.  In the meantime, while we are looking to see if Nebojsa has audio, he posted a question in the chat room which perhaps, Chengetai, you could answer, if there is anyone on the phone, the question is regarding which days of the IGF there will be support for MAG members.
  (ringing).
The question is it for travel on the 23rd and returning on the 30th but they need to know the exact dates in order to make the accommodation bookings.  Chengetai?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, it's the day before the meeting until the 30th.  24th to 30th.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Hopefully that answers your question, Nebojsa.  If not, maybe we can follow up.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: But the hotel, if I'm not mistaken, is provided by the host, so you don't have to worry about the hotel booking.  Can you hear me?  You don't need to worry about the hotel booking.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Maybe you can send a note out afterwards, Chengetai, to confirm that for everyone, in case there is anyone else who has a question.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Okay, sure.  That is including Day Zero, so we will inform you about the travel arrangements this week.  But the, don't go around, please don't go and book your hotel, because the hotel is generously provided by the Host Country.  So don't book a hotel.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you.  I see a note here from Anriette, who needs to leave in a moment but she is a consultant working with a couple of the BPFs.  If people are okay, and I know we are jumping around a little bit here but I think it is important to get these updates in.  Anriette, would you prefer to keep typing?  I see your gender and access one in, or is there something else you want to add to the comments you put in the chat room?
>> Thanks, Lynn.  I'll quickly add to that.  [inaudible] I'm not sure [inaudible] sent apology, the gender and access one is going well.  We have quite a lot of data already.  It is just a case of putting it all together into a report.  Anyone who is interested, look at the Web site.  We have the summary of the call for input, responses, and we are busy building a map of resources, and we have a rough draft of a report.  I hope to send it to the MAG for input on Friday.  Then we will spend the rest of the time refining the recommendations between now and the IGF.  Local content we had nine responses to the call for input so that is going slower.  If there is anyone on the MAG who would like to support Giacomo and Carlos Alfonso write to me or put something in the chat so I can follow up with you.  We have a theme, we have some content, but we still have quite a lot of work to do on that.
That is really it.  Lynn, I made a note to draw Rudolf's attention that the visa company insisted on a name of a person at the Ministry.  Rudolf, I gave them your name.  I really hope they don't bother you.  But they insisted that I give a name.
>> That's fine.
>> Thanks, Rudolf.  That is all from me, Lynn.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Anriette and thank MAG members too for supporting the moving agenda here.  Ben is offering since we are in the BPFs to go to a brief BPF Cybersecurity update.  Why don't we do that, see if we can finish out the BPF updates, and then Chengetai and I will go to the closing sessions.  Ben, you have the floor.
>> BEN WALLIS: Thank you, Lynn, good morning.  The BPF on Cybersecurity received six response and we are also expecting information from the Paris call, and the global commission on security and cyberspace, when they announce the next steps of their work next month ahead of the meeting.  This year, we decided to reflect the responses that we received by incorporating them into a research paper that we produced in June.  That was instead of the previous approach where we had a research paper and then a separate summary of responses this year, we have incorporated them into a single paper.  We have sent that draft report to the BPF for comments, and then it will be published next week for the entire IGF community to be able to look at for four or five weeks ahead of the IGF in Berlin.  I wanted to, while I had the floor, remind you of my question in the chat if it's possible to hear from Chengetai about his field trip to Poland two weeks ago, that would be great.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Ben.  Let's put that under AOB so that we stay focused on this year's, and we will ask Chengetai to provide a brief update later.
>> Good idea, thanks.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you.  Any follow on questions for those three BPFs and I'd like to see if we can get a brief update on the artificial intelligence Internet of Things, big data.
>> Hi, can you hear me?
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Yes, we can very well, thank you.
>> The BPF we had the last meeting on 9 of October, and we updated about the results so we had the last mission, and we also [inaudible] on the draft document, we are going to publish on the 25th of October, and then we are now trying to discuss how to structure the workshop at the global IGF, try to collect names of speaker and so on.  We also discussed the idea to launch a short survey before the workshop on the three main policy question that came out this month related to the trust of IoT artificial intelligence using the application and also related to data.
The next meeting will be on the 22nd of October.  That is all.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you very much.  Final call for any questions from MAG members on the BPF reports?  Not seeing any.  Really appreciate all the work of the coordinators and the consultants as well.  The BPF activities are very important, and some of the more kind of substantive outputs of the IGF.  So very much appreciate all the effort.  Not seeing any other requests for the floor on that, if we can just go back quickly to the closing sessions, again, they somewhat mirror the Opening Sessions in that there is a formal Closing Ceremony, which is coordinated and organized by the United Nations and by the Host Country.  So they are usually some fairly formal closing speeches with the representative of the Host Country and the United Nations, and then we have some speakers from the community as well.
Typically, that takes or is allowed sort of an hour.  One of the things I think Chengetai and I are assuming is that that would be where any kind of comments or read out from the parliamentarians would take place.  Before we talk about that a little more, let me move to the other part of the closing session, and again the entire three hour block is sort of a shared responsibility between the MAG, the Host Country and the United Nations, with as I just said, the official Closing Ceremony really being given largely by the United Nations and the Host Country.
The other block of time, the community time, has varied from, everything from sort of in Paris, we left it a very sort of unstructured open mic time, partly because we were expecting a fairly significant discussion from the community both on President Macron's call and the Secretary General's comments as well.  So we decided it best since that was quite new, both of those were quite new to leave the time fairly unstructured.  This year, we are actually contemplating splitting that two hour into maybe three sort of main sessions, one, to have a report out on the key messages from the three tracks, that would largely be built up from the key messages that are collected over the course of the week, plus any of the concluding sessions, I think we are calling them now, and again as you know, the MAG worked hard to build narratives around the three themes, and in fact to structure the workshops, in support of advancing that theme along their own kind of trajectories.  I think it would be good to call that out and focus on the key messages in that same sort of format which is I believe what everybody is working towards with respect to all of the reporting mechanisms and processes.
What we thought we would do in a second portion was allow time to come back on the main session on the digital cooperation report.  I'll talk to that later in the agenda, but the Secretary General's office has been clear that they are looking for a fairly substantive discussion, really would like to understand what the IGF community thinks specific to the recommendations in section 5 built on the models in section 4, namely but not solely the IGF plus smart role, so if we believe we are actually able to drive that discussion in fairly substantive manner in the main session on day one, we thought it might be useful to allow some time to come back on the final closing session if there are any kind of further thoughts or reflections.
The third session was a traditional open mic session.  So I think first I would ask Chengetai, he and I spoke yesterday afternoon, if that sort of fits with our discussion yesterday, and then ask Rudolf if he has any kind of questions, suggestions, concerns, etcetera, but first Chengetai, does that sort of reflect where we were yesterday?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, it does.  Also in the bringing it all together session, I think there was a question asked I think it was E mail or something, that also will be the time when we can get a summary from the DC and also the BPF and the open forums if they fit.  Open forums are going to be a little difficult but we will try and do it for the open forums as well.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Chengetai, is it not possible to include those key messages and updates in the three themes?  I mean that was part of   
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: That was the question, is that some of them don't actually fit.  So if they don't fit, we can also have an other category, I think, because open forums it wasn't a requirement that they fit into the three themes.  But we did ask them to look at the three themes and see if they could fit but it wasn't a requirement.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: We need to think that through quite carefully, because I'm not sure how we make the distinction, and how a distinction is understood by the other community members.  Of course, if you add up all the open forums, DCs, BPFs, we are probably close to a hundred, so I know we are not looking for a hundred individual reports, and I think that goes   
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: No, no, we are only going to get one person from, one person representing the DCs, one person representing, I mean this is my thought on it, but let's discuss this later.  It's something that came up between yesterday and today.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Okay, that's good.  Can definitely see the value, specifically and in the NRIs as well, as a separate, it's a great opportunity to showcase their work, their activities, and growth as well.  So I think that would be a good place to do that.  We can think through the other ones as well.  Let me add, Rudolf, any questions?
>> Yes.  First of all, I don't think that it is, from an outside world perspective, very wise to divide the key messages into workshops and best practice fora NRIs because that is of no interest to anybody.  I think it would be more interesting to have the three tracks, the three themes, and then feed into the three themes everything that comes out of whatever.  Be it Open Forum, be it a NRI session, and so forth, so that we can, because we should speak to the three themes.  That is a major achievement of this IGF (overlapping speakers) I think it would be bad because at the end it is not important if an idea or a thought comes out of a workshop or out of a BPF, I mean it's, for the people it is important but not for the message.  I think it's more important to feed all these tracks into the themes, and then present the themes and say, okay, we had a convergence amongst certain ideas and there was divergence.
>> Oh!
>>  And for this   
>>   Yeah.  I love you, have a great   
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Luis, can you close that mic?
  (voices in the background) 
>> Who is it?
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: The mic is closed now.
>> Okay, thank you.  That's for one.
And then would you see the, like official Closing Ceremony with Host Country and UN at the end of the three, after the three steps that you described?  Is that the    is it correct?
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Normally when they happen, isn't that correct, Chengetai?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, usually the last thing is the closing and handing back of the chairmanship.
>> Okay, we should think about it, but from my experience from last year, not so much from the year before but from last year was that this open mic session was quite long and burdensome.  So I don't know if we, I mean we should try to give it a certain climate so perhaps we should start with the open mic and then go to the more like content or summary oriented points, but we can think about it.  Then there will be our Minister of state for digital affairs, who will be the German representative on this last segment.  I don't know who will it be from the United Nations.  Is this clear already?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: I will ask Deniz if he has a comment on that.
>> We don't, okay.  We'll see.  Then to flag it, there will be also after this official closing, there will be a, like a German Polish, yeah, I don't know, party, as a little bit, as the reception we had last year, it will be in collaboration, but it will be an outlook or first flavor for the Polish Host Countryship of next year, so that will be then in the evening or after the official closing.  And everyone is invited, of course.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Rudolf for that, and to the Polish Government as well.  Chengetai and I just kind of did this yesterday and it hasn't been written up yet, we clearly have some flexibility with respect to when those three community sessions, again it was the traditional open mic, we thought a kind of reflections for the consultation on the digital cooperation report, and then of course the reporting out on key messages from the main themes, we have flexibility with respect to where we put those.
I don't know, and this is a question for Chengetai, WaiMin or Deniz, what flexibility we have with respect to the formal closing and the UN and the handing back of the Chairmanship.  I don't know if that needs to happen as the last order of business, but even that could be separated from the speech of your high level representative, I believe.  So I think we can work on those finer   
>>   Yeah, we will, okay, we will do.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Let me ask Chengetai, WaiMin or Deniz if there is anything we need to adhere to at this point so we all walk away with the same understanding.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: For myself, I think it can be fairly flexible.  I don't think we have to have any hard standard and it is the IGF after all, but I don't know if Deniz or WaiMin will have anything else to say about that.
>> Hi, this is WaiMin UNDESA, I also agree that there is flexibility.  I do echo Rudolf's point that for the closing it should be coming back to the three themes, rather than separate track reporting.  That's one.  Secondly also on the last formality it is usually someone from the UN, in this case I don't know the person yet, who will do the final closing, but the speaker, Poland will do a short presentation that is tradition.  How the rest of the pieces that could come in including HLPDC we should discuss further, just not to give the, just to give the right message how to take it forward.  Myself, I understand the dynamics but we don't have the clarity about the HLPDC recommendations but it may not get agreement, or need to discuss in consultation with the SG office.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Let me come back to the last point there for a minute.  This is less, less a consultation about the HLPDC, less a consultation even about the report, the digital cooperation report, and more I think building on every year the discussions on improvements to the IGF, some of which are suggested in the digital cooperation report, some of which have been suggested in the taking stock every year in the CSCD, IGF improvements and many vehicles, all of those get back to what are the improvements we should be looking for or working towards within the IGF.  It was in that context that both the main session and any follow up sessions should we decide to have one is focused.
It is not specific to the HLPDC effort per se.  Think of it as using it as a platform or something.  I think we need to make that clear.  But throughout the whole program, there is a focus on the future of Internet Governance, and of course as a subset of that, we should all be thinking about the role and the contribution the IGF can make to this so we can go forward.  It was kind of in that context.
But again, we will continue to think all this through and share all the updates on the MAG list as well.  Let me see if there are any other comments.  Rudolf, I'm not sure if you were finished with your remarks earlier or if you have any further comments.
>> Yes, I'm finished.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you.  Chengetai, anything further?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Well, yes, I want to say yes, I agree with the three themes.  I was talking about another theme to catch anything that can't be put into those three themes, but of course, we can just have the three themes if you want.  That is it.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Maybe we should set some guidelines.  Of course anything substantive which happens at the IGF should it not fit neatly into one of those three themes can still be captured in the Chair summary or in the key messages or other vehicles.  If we are taking community time with what we hope will be a few thousand people participating, and I think it needs to be something which is actually either looking for interaction with the community, or a substantive, something substantive like these are the key messages, these are what we are all taking away from this week here.  It needs to be something with broad support and broad appeal.  Otherwise there are other vehicles for ensuring that those activities are understood or known.  But Chengetai, do you think we could start to write up with Rudolf kind of the Closing Ceremony and the expectations a little bit, so we all make sure we are   
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Sure, yes.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Sometimes this is left quite late and nobody needs to be trying to organize this in the background at the IGF itself.  It's not a lot of fun.  So if we can get it laid out ahead of time, and even get any requests to the community for their speakers out early, that would be helpful.
We are sort of halfway through agenda item 5.  We had the updates from the best practice forums.  We are looking for updates from the Dynamic Coalitions, and the NRIs in particular.  Is there someone who can give us a update on the DCs?
>> Hello, Lynn.  (overlapping speakers) can you hear me?
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: We can hear you, thank you Jutta.
>> JUTTA CROLL: I can give a short update from the Dynamic Coalitions, that is mainly in regards to the main session of the Dynamic Coalition so I'm not sure whether I should do it at this point of the agenda or at agenda point 9.  When do you like, do you want me to speak.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Now would be fine, Jutta.  Now would be good.
>> JUTTA CROLL: Dynamic Coalitions had a call by last week to discuss the papers that are submitted by so far ten different Dynamic Coalitions who are willing to have a joint main session, as announced before with a title Dynamic Coalitions joint efforts to achieve the SDGs.  We were happy to appoint two moderators for the session which is Tatiana who's already done that I do think during the Geneva IGF moderating the DCs main session, and she will be accompanied by Michael who will be the counterpart for moderating the session.
We decided that the session will mainly follow the issues addressed by the SDGs, so that would mean that we don't have a session where Dynamic Coalitions are presenting their work one after another in a row, but it will be more organized like addressing SDGs, which of the Dynamic Coalitions is addressing a certain Sustainable Development Goal with their work, and then with these issues shall be addressed with a couple of policy questions that are already suggested by the Dynamic Coalitions.  We have a draft, preliminary structure of the session by now, that will be reviewed during the coming two weeks by Dynamic Coalitions, so that we are pretty sure that we will be able to provide the pre session report by the deadline that was set on October 28.  Dynamic Coalitions [inaudible] the deadline of twelve hours after finishing a session, not only for the main session, because the main sessions are mainly in the morning, but also for Dynamic Coalition sessions, some were afraid when having the session late in the afternoon around 6:00 that it would be a bit of a burden to have the report uploaded twelve hours later, so that would mean that the work should be done during the night, and when I raised these concerns during the call, I wasn't in the position to answer the question, why the deadline was set as 12 hours, which would mean also not only for Dynamic Coalitions but for other session and virtual organizers to do the reporting overnight, and maybe this could be answered by someone else from the group that was working on the reports.  I know I should have been involved but I just couldn't manage to do so.
I think that's more or less an update from the Dynamic Coalitions, and I would be happy to report back to Dynamic Coalitions with regard to the question of the reports.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Jutta.  Thank you for all the work you are doing to work with the DCs.  Chengetai, do you have a comment on the timing?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: It's mainly because we want to have those reports so that we can add them into the Chairman's summary, and maybe into the press briefings as well.  So this is, the sooner we get the information, the quicker we can probably get the information, and this also goes for the last day, so we will basically be missing everything in the last day which will have to be commented on or condensed and summarized later after the meeting.  That's why.
>> JUTTA CROLL: May I ask something back then, because I really appreciate this approach that workshop and session organizers should try to send the output of their session into the reports, the Chairman's, Chair's report and so on, that is very important.  The question was also whether these reports, the twelve hour reports were mandatory for applying for workshop or session next year, or are only the detailed reports that then I do think they are viewed two weeks after the IGF, whether these are mandatory for new workshop session because it makes a difference, so if you have the feeling that something came out from your workshop that is really important to go into the reports, and maybe also into public reports, then it's different than if you only do that report because you know you need to do it to have a chance to apply for a session also next year.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Well, we would hope that people are doing it because they feel that something valuable has come out of the session, and the reports are more or less mandatory.  Whether or not we look at whether    well, this is the thing, we hope that people are doing the reports and they agree on the reasoning behind why we have a pre session report, a12 hour after report and then the more detailed report afterwards, and that report that is due twelve hours doesn't have to be that detailed.  It is just the key points that have stuck out, something that we can say during the meeting was discussed.  Yes, when the Secretariat does look at it, we do look at whether or not a report was filed.  Does that    yes, WaiMin.  Please.
>> This is WaiMin, UNDESA.  I'd like to add on to what Chengetai said, the 12 hour follows a lot of the usual way of a U.N. reporting, especially when there are events that runs through four days or a week.  The rationale is also correspond to some of the improvement of the IGF which is on reporting and sharing outcome.  We understand the 12 hour may not be fair to everyone based on the timing as you correctly highlighted.
  (beeping).
But we do call for the understanding as this has to, has to come up with corresponding system that will work for everybody, because not to forget, upon the submission of all each of the session reports, the Secretariat staff, ourselves and other colleagues look at how, in order to have highlights be included in the Chair summary or the IGF messages and others, so it's a collective efforts.  The 12 hour is mandatory but let's say one group be for what reason, need an hour, two hours more, please let us know.  I'm sure we can accommodate.  Thank you.
>> JUTTA CROLL: Thank you very much for these clear answers.  I really do appreciate and I do think that all workshop organizers it should be in their best interests to bring their own messages from their workshops into the reporting.  So I really appreciate this is a clear message, and I will report that back to the Dynamic Coalitions.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Jutta, Chengetai and WaiMin as well.  Are there any further questions on the DCs or the DC organized main session?  Not seeing any and no hands were raised earlier, either, let me move to an update on the NRI sessions and the NRI main session, Anja.
>> Hi, Lynn and everyone, I will build on the update that was given for the NRIs at the previous MAG meeting.  The records of the NRIs didn't change in comparison to the updates from the last MAG meeting, we still have 121 as total number of NRI with 87 national and [inaudible] IGF, particularly in this week, basically every day we are having virtual meetings for the co organizers, NRI collaborative sessions, as we are finalizing the consolidation of their written inputs, and also agreeing on who could be the moderators for those sessions.  So I believe by Monday next week, we will have the sessions completely finalized, and output documents put online for final commenting of the NRIs.
For the NRIs main session this week we are planning the next virtual meeting that is going to take place during the next week and by the next week the first draft of the consolidated inputs will be available for the NRIs commenting for hopefully ten days time, and then we will share with the MAG and the community as well.
Finally, the NRIs do plan their coordination sessions, so I will be soon on behalf of the network reaching out to the MAG as well to perhaps give you the agenda and see if there is anything that the MAG would suggest to be on the agenda, because that meeting is an open work meeting between the NRIs but also the Chair of the MAG and of course the MAG itself, DESA and the IGF Secretariat.
I think the agenda so far looks very interesting, because this year was a specific, we will be discussing the capacity development program that was done in regard to supporting few NRIs, also the travel support that is already on the agenda, some of the NRIs suggested that on the agenda we actually put the discussion on why the IGF ecosystem supporting the NRIs and in that regard why some of the key global players that are financial incentive supporting NRIs for example is ISOC and some private sector companies and so on.  We are putting the list currently and we will have all of you informed soon.  Also, yes, finally, this presentation, the NRI presentation, visual presentation for the NRI booth should be done also next week for the NRIs that are hosting the meeting so far, so that is also a public record available on the IGF Web site for your review as well.  That will be it for me for now.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Anja, thank you very much.  We really appreciate your continued updates and of course all the activities of the NRIs as well.  Are there any comments or questions on the NRI sessions, the NRI organized main session, or other activities?  Not seeing any, and again, no requests for the floor.  I thank Anja for the report and Jutta for the report on DCs.  And we will move to the next item, which is updates from the working groups.  We have four formally established working groups and one ad hoc, is there anyone who wants to go first, either the improvements, the workshop prep or outreach and engagement?
>> Good morning, Lynn.  Thank you very much.  This is June Parris reporting for both improvements and for outreach and engagement.  Colleagues indisposed at this moment so we haven't done much within the last two weeks for both groups.  What I want to say about outreach and engagement is our digital marketing chart has been shared but we are not sure how useful this has been to the Secretariat, we can still improve on it and we are waiting for some digital additions to this chart, with improvements, we still have to complete our updates.  I did some recommendations on, Chenai said she will work on hers soon before the IGF, I think within the next week.  We are still looking for volunteers for both groups, to make the group a bit stronger, so that we start next year bigger and better.  Thank you, that is all for today.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, June.  A quick comment on the two groups, I followed the work of the working group improvements quite closely over the years, a little less closely this last year in terms of total workload but it's a really important set of activities.  It has captured all the suggestions for improvements to the IGF going back to day one.  So the CSG working group on IGF improvements, the [inaudible] 2016, taking stock sessions of each one of the IGF, WSIS+10 report and it has very usefully categorized those according to type of suggestion, and the entire intent was to indicate which ones were complete, which ones were still open, and who had responsibility for driving them, so it's an extremely useful piece of work, and it's actually quite close to completion.  Maybe June, if you could kind of forward a request out to the MAG members again, to take a look at it, remind everybody that it's there, and really, it is something that I think we should find a way to bring up to current time, underline those things that have been done, possibly prepare a report on those things that have been done, and then move forward with a smaller list.  I do think again that it's been a very useful and very interesting exercise, and was an incredible amount of work by the earlier working group as well.  So it would be nice to take it this last few yards over the finish line.
>> JUNE PARRIS: Yes.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: If people could support it, that would be great.
>> JUNE PARRIS: Yes, Chenai and myself will work on that.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: If there is anything else I can do to help as well, let me know.  But perhaps just start by reminding the MAG that it's there and again, how close we are.
>> JUNE PARRIS: Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: On the working group on outreach and engagement, maybe, you have probably already done this, but maybe a separate meeting with the Secretariat to understand whether or not that mapping exercise was helpful and if there are any areas for improvement or anything else that would be more useful, maybe an off line meeting is the best way to progress that, although having said that, I do appreciate how absolutely busy the Secretariat is at this point in time.  So if we are not able to get to it now, hopefully we can get to it in the next month or so, two months maybe.
>> JUNE PARRIS: Yes, thank you, Lynn.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, June.  Thank you.
Jutta, is there any update on the workshop evaluation, workshop prep working group?
>> JUTTA CROLL: No update at this point of time.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Jutta.  Is the survey still open to the, those that submitted workshop proposals?
>> JUTTA CROLL: I do think we need Luis to answer that question?  I'm not sure about that.  I do think it must be closed, but Luis, maybe you can answer that properly.
>> LUIS BOBO: Yes, hello, thank you.  Yeah, it should be closing but it is not closed, we usually leave it open until later because there were not so many answers like 30 or something like that, for your knowledge.  We sent this reminder one week before, and we receive a little more.  But this was the figure.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Jutta, maybe the working group would take a quick look at that, determine whether or not you want to make a last, last call.  But even with the 30 responses, it would be useful to understand the feedback, certainly ahead of the IGF, and if appropriate, we can take that into the IGF and certainly the incoming MAG should be aware of any of those comments as we actually begin planning next year.
>> JUTTA CROLL: Of course, I do agree with that approach, but probably we can leave it open a bit, because it doesn't impact on what we are doing now in advance of the meeting we have in November.  But it would be preferable to have the analysis of the responses when we have the first meeting with the incoming MAG members.  So maybe we can leave it open a little bit more coming closer to the November date, and then close it so that we have at least two weeks to analyze the output of that exercise.  I will go back to the working group, ask for their opinion on that.
But personally, I would say we can leave it open, and if at least we get five or ten more answers, that would be helpful.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: I think that's good.  Luis put a note in the chat room saying there are 39 responses.  I do think if you can close it in time so that the outgoing MAG actually gets the report as well, I mean there is learning in it for all of us with respect to how this year's process went, what could have been improved and if anything, how it might have affected positively or negatively the overall program as well.  So if there could be a high level synthesis of that for the outgoing MAG, I think we would find that useful.  Presumably this is not most people's last chance to participate in    (chuckles).
>> JUTTA CROLL: I agree, absolutely.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Super.  Thank you, Jutta.  I know you are busy as well, you have taken on additional responsibilities with respect to organizing the IGF as well.  So appreciate that, and if there is anything I or the Secretariat can do to help, don't hesitate to let us know.
Two other quick updates, there was a lightweight fund raising working group that was started, and we had a meeting and looked at some things we might do.  Two things, we are going to hold a, I think it has been called the donors meeting but that is not the right title, and Chengetai and I are looking for a better title, a meeting, a session at this IGF, which will actually focus on why supporting the IGF is important, and why some entities provide support.  We are looking for some presenters both from the developing south, to talk about why the IGF is important to them, and then equally for a few other speakers with respect to why they support the IGF in a substantive manner.  So there are obviously a couple of governments that support the very substantive manner.  There are, Google, for instance in the private sector has always supported the IGF very substantively, there are one or two others, but frankly, many of them are fairly modest levels if I can say it that way.  Then of course, the technical community, ISOC, ICANN, the RARs have always been substantial supporters as well.
We are looking to get a cross section of representatives to speak, we are looking for just three to five minute short speeches, and we want them to be powerful and have an impact.  This is why the IGF matters to me, this is why it's important, and this is why we have supported it.  We would also have a very short session as well which makes it clear that the IGF is a extra budgetary project within the United Nations system, that all of its funding comes from donations to a trust fund, and of course that the annual meeting is very largely supported by the Host Country.  So just a few of those kind of pertinent facts as well as of course how people can contribute.
So it really is much more of a pitch for why the IGF is important, why support matters, why people have chosen to support, than per se the traditional donors meeting.  I think we probably need to decide whether or not we need a separate donors meeting, somewhere in the margins, but I believe we have now agreed that that meeting I was just describing is going to be on day 2, 8:30 to 9:20 in the morning, is that right, Chengetai?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, but I still have to clear it with New York first, because if the USG can attend that would be good, so yeah.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: That would be good, if we need to move it around, we can move it around.  Other than that, I know, let me see, is Rudolf still on the call?  We are still trying to figure out whether or not there is an opportunity to make a different sort of pitch if I can use that word, given the leaders that are present, I don't know if Rudolf has anything more to say on that at this point in time.
>> I'm still here, but I have not so much to add at the moment.  Sorry.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: No, that's fine, Rudolf.  Again, obviously the German governments have been very supportive of trying to make it clear why the IGF is important, why it's important to support it substantially, and of course they are showing that very clearly this year with all of their support.  So we are still looking for ways to make that point even more broadly during the IGF itself.
So we will continue to look at that.  The other one, there is an ad hoc group on reporting, the primary focus on this was to make sure that we were building on what the MAG was trying to do with respect to the narrative and the focus on the three main themes, and streaming the sub themes under those themes, but that was carried out consistently through the reporting and all the related reporting activities.  I think that's progressing well in terms of management of logistics and administration.  We also have been focused on preparing proposals for the MAG for the introductory sessions, I think that's complete and agreed, and for the concluding sessions at which there is a discussion ongoing at the moment on the MAG list.  And I would encourage everyone on the MAG to look through those comments.  If Timae is on the call, I could ask her to give, I guess we have that session under number 8 in a couple of updates, give us a update in terms of where we are on the concluding sessions, reports, and we are trying to do various little things, with respect to making the reporting concise and also forward looking, so we are in the process of looking into whether or not we can, and we can, Luis said that we can, just what format it takes, provide a sort of quick survey question or questions, specific to each workshop session, that's happened, and the question would be something like what could be done in the coming year to further advance this particular issue, with some indication as to other partners or where it might be led from.  And there are some other things we are considering as well, which is maybe a quick show of hands at some point during the session by stakeholder group, which would certainly allow us to kind of get a view as to how diverse any of our sessions were, and then too would also give some indication as to which sessions were of most interest to which stakeholder groups.  It would be very informal.  It is not a count or a vote.  People would be asked to self identify, but just a quick high level percentage.  So those are some of the things we are trying to build in this year.  Again, most of this if not all of this is taking place discussion on the MAG list, so I would encourage everybody to pay attention.
Let me stop there and see if there are any comments from any of the MAG members on any of those five working group reports.  Or additional comments from anyone?  Looking at Michael's comment in the chat room, which is suggesting a documentary be done by the host and the Secretariat.  It would be interesting if we could do something like that, there is a awful lot of material, including the work of the Elon university who always does a thorough survey as well.  We can that take up, Michael, it's a good suggestion.  Not seeing any further requests for the floor, why don't we move to the next agenda item, which is the UN digital cooperation report consultation and the main session planning around that.
Rudolf and I had a meeting discussion with Fabricio Rothschild which was previously in the office of the Secretary General and was the individual who was championing the HLPDC, he's moved to take responsibility for the UN at 75 celebration, which is next year, but has maintained responsibility for any follow up or next steps for the HLPDC.  So we had a phone call with him and a couple of individuals from his office, and I have a couple of notes here, Rudolf from our meeting, which I'm happy to share and if you would like to go first, you are very welcome to go first as well, and we can both just supplement each other's reports.  It's up to you.
>> Go ahead, Lynn, it's okay.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Basically, they gave us a update on how the consultation is going within the UN system, stated that there were many initiatives that they see being launched across the UN in response to the report, and that's basically in line with their flexible consultation model, where they were hoping that various committees and organizations and entities within the UN system and beyond would look at the report and take into consideration any of the ideas that they thought interesting or important, and they have reported out that in fact, that is being done and many initiatives are being launched in response to the report.
They have been working to gather feedback and reactions.  There is a very small Secretariat, basically the one consultant and a small piece of two individuals' times out of the USG's office, under Fabricio's guidance and they said out of 500 approaches they have received about a hundred responses, I think many of them are actually verbal.  They said they have had a number of fairly substantive written responses.  I think they are probably largely from the same people that have contributed, the same, some of the same entities that have contributed to our consultation, because specifically they mentioned governments of UK, Finland, Switzerland, etcetera, all of whom have also contributed to ours.
They reported that there is significant support for the IGF plus model, plus there are some level of interest expressed for some of the other aspects of the other two models, but that their primary focus is on the IGF plus model on the basis of the responses they have been getting.
They are currently mapping the comments that they have received pretty much at a high level, kind of a support, no support level, and trying to identify whether there are any suggestions for changes or new ideas.  They also mention that they are looking to create multistakeholder working groups, which would be used to advance those recommendations or suggestions that are coming out of their consultation process, and they continue to stress that it's a flexible consultation process, it's not a formal consultation process ala traditional UN styles.
They want to use those recommendations or suggestions, and map them to existing initiatives and identifying any gaps, and use those to begin carrying forward any possible suggestions or recommendations.  They did stress that the working groups would be open.  I think they are primarily building the working groups up sort of on a word of mouth structure.  But if people have interest in participating in those working groups, they will be open.  People can join at any time.  They are not, as I understand it, they are not yet established.  This is all kind of a work in process, and really trying to test what process, what side of activities would be supported, both within the UN system and by the community as well.  And we should be hearing further updates on that during the main session, at the IGF.
In brief, I think I probably classify it as they are really interested in understanding what an improved IGF or IGF plus could look like, what are the communities' thoughts on that.  They did state that they believe that many of the recommendations they are hearing or perhaps even were in the report itself do not need to go back to the General Assembly, but obviously any text in support of the UN at 75th would indeed need to go back to the General Assembly.
Then the only other comment was that there are a small number of countries that seem keen to convene an informal consulting process.  I do not know where that stands or what that would look like.  I don't even know if some of the working groups they are talking about convening would in fact support that or not.  But they did mention a number of, a couple of countries who are interested in supporting that, specifically the ones that I recall being mentioned were Singapore, Finland, Mexico, UAE, Switzerland.
But with respect to the main session, they have said that they would share their mapping report from their consultation activity no later than early November.  I've stated that our consultation process closes middle of October.  In fact, I think that's supposedly or nominally today.  The responses were quite light, the last I looked, there were about, there were certainly less than sort of 15 formal responses, and I think there were only about five or six people that actually commented in line on the commenting platform.
But we would look at those responses, and prepare our own kind of report on them.  I think with that light a consultation, it will be very difficult to position them as any sort of kind of robust hearing or position from across the community, but at least it will give us some insight.  And right now, the working model for the main session is still that we would focus on the recommendations in section 5 of the report.  It will be built on the models that were outlined in chapter 4, specifically in the IGF plus, and try to set up discussions within the room that looks for kind of suggestions or input basically on the various models and their, I guess, relevance, their importance and whether or not there's support for them.  And with all this, of course, we need to be very careful, because this is not nearly as robust a consultation as we would expect.  I wouldn't label what's been done to date as kind of an IGF position at all.  I think the response has been far too light.
I think we need to continue to think about how we actually set this up and structure it during the main session itself.  I think a lot of the IGF community might be looking at this as kind of a discussion and an input.  I think the C.O. and his team are probably looking to come out of this IGF including with their bilateral consultations with what they would see as some recommendations that they would like to take forward within whatever lightweight flexible process they think is important moving towards the UN at 75.
So, that was a lot.  Let me see first if Rudolf has anything to add or if he thinks anything wasn't stated clearly.
>> That was quite comprehensive, no, that was quite comprehensive.  And yeah, it seems that they are eager to somehow structure the process without preempting the outcome, and that is very in line and I have the impression that they are very sensitive towards the multistakeholder approach, towards the IGF as general and are hoping to get real substantial input from the IGF.  So I think it's a real opportunity for the MAG, for the IGF community as a whole, to give that input at the IGF in Berlin because, and that is also clear, if we don't give it, others will.  And then this is a unique chance that we shouldn't risk.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Rudolf.  I totally agree with that.  The IGF has always been about continuous improvement and we have always been looking for ways to improve and to do things better.  I think this is an opportunity to kind of put some weight behind our own efforts, and get our own very very considerable experience with these sorts of processes and with Internet Governance and policy matters itself and feed them into this kind of burgeoning process if you will.
I did ask on the call, so that I wanted to give a thorough update to the MAG meeting this week, and wanted to make sure that what they were sharing was appropriate for that.  I don't like surprises in this sort of instance, so I just like to be clear.  They said no problem, there are no secrets, they are trying to talk to as many people as they can, to get as much input as they can, so that they can understand how best to move forward with respect to process inside and recommendations, and with every conversation as Rudolf just said as well, they are very clear that they are looking for substantive recommendations, substantive suggestions, and so I think we need to find a way to match that with the IGF process, the IGF community, and this unique opportunity here at the IGF.
Are there any comments or questions, anything anyone wants to add, anything they have heard from their own resources, own representatives?
Not seeing any requests from the floor, we will continue to work on the main session.  I would encourage everybody to really familiarize yourself and think carefully about the recommendations, think carefully about the models, think carefully about any other things you think that the IGF should be addressing in terms of improvements, because that is an opportunity to bring them forward is during this IGF and leading up.  We will get some preliminary documents out that we intend to kind of drive the discussion in the main session.  They will be drafted with the help of Fabricio and his team to be sure we are pulling out the things that they are hearing, and making them known and addressing them in the community here as well.  I think that is one of the kind of most critical things we can do to help advance this.
Last call on any other questions, comments, reflections?
Not seeing any, we will move to item 8, which is updates on the thematic introductory concluding sessions.  As I said earlier, I think we are all set on the introductory sessions.  But I'll do a quick call to see if there's any questions to any MAG members or if there is anything on the introductory sessions from the working group members.  And then we will go to the concluding session.  Are there any comments or questions on the introductory?
>> Lynn, it's Ben Wallis.  I'm co leading the data governance introductory and concluding sessions.  You said earlier, partly the update could be a call for volunteers, I'm happy to report we have now got three, we got volunteers to lead three of the six breakout sessions.  I know there is lots of people on the list, I think we have had three or four people respond to the document that Lucia and I sent out.  So it would still be good to get more engagement with the documents.  What we did last week was to, following the discussion on the MAG list, we have incorporated the concluding session into the same Google document, so that, and kind of mirroring the introductory session and the concluding session, and so that we have followed the structure that was set out in the Google doc that Timae and Maria and somebody else produced, and follows the same breakout groups and reporting back.
The only other update from the data governance sessions are that we, Chenai is looking into whether Tim Berners Lee or someone could be [inaudible] Chenai is working at the Web Foundation which is led by Tim Berners Lee and is the organization that's put out the contract for the Web.  So I'll leave it there.  That was my short update on the data governance group, and I will post in the chat now the latest version of the Google doc.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Ben.  As people are getting down to the last preparations, I think the best thing still is to put a note out to the MAG list, be very clear and maybe it's resources required, introductory session X, and if we are at the stage where we are looking beyond MAG members to support the introduction of some of those, I think to make that clear as well, this is one of the last pieces of work we need to do but it is important that the MAG members all help support both the introductory and concluding sessions, as it really is what will hold these themes and these narratives together.  So please, if you need suggestions for resources, put the call out.  Obviously you can put it on your own networks as well, but the MAG should be in a good position to make some suggestions too.
Are there any other questions on the introductory?  As I said, I think we finalized on that format a few meetings ago.  This is more about executing.
>> Hi, Lynn.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Hi, Paul.
>> I wanted to ask, is there a process for us to market the introduction sessions to participants and those particular themes.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: That is interesting.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, we can handle that, we can send E mails out to the workshop organizers informing them.
>> Possibly we would want to do a form of introduction or some small paragraph about why we would want them to attend or something, which should be common I think against all the themes, and then the Secretariat sends it out to all the workshop proposers to try and entice them to come, and also to book their two minute or one minute, whatever it is, introductory session because it is part of the introduction session that enables the workshop proposers to do a short spiel on their particular workshop to try to entice people to go to the workshop, because everything is competing, as we go through the streams.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yeah, that is no problem, we can work on it after this, we can contact you and then we can just come up with something together, and then send it out.  Yeah.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Paul, that was a great suggestion.  Ben, you have the floor.
>> Yes, thanks, I'm inspired by Paul there.  My understanding was that the next step was actually to work with the Secretariat so they could write to all of the organizers of sessions that fall under the data governance theme, and the organizers, Rapporteurs, speakers, and in some kind of invitation we are holding this session, this is what it's going to be, these are dates and times, please come along, and so that is what I understood to be my next step, once we kind of made sure all MAG members have been able to comment on their approach and volunteer.  So in a way, I agree with Paul, and it's definitely what I would hope to do is a way of reaching out to people who will be in Berlin and leading those various data governance workshops, forums, etcetera to get them to come along to the sessions, know why they are relevant.
The other thing that Paul said about inviting them to prepare their minute, so they can talk at the introductory session about their workshop and get people to come along, in our group we decided it wouldn't really be feasible to have, I mean we have got 35 sessions, kind of set aside 35 minutes for people to go minute by minute.  So we are going to kind of let it be more organic, if people in their comments and their contributions want to talk about their session and mention it, that's great and we encourage them to do so but we are not going to formally invite people to give a one minute elevator pitch for their workshop.  So just thought I'd share that as well.  Thanks.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Ben.  Any further comments on the introductory session?  As I said, I think that was largely approved a couple of meetings ago.  I know there has been a lot of discussion to continue to refine that.  I think that was helpful.  There is a discussion going on currently with respect to the concluding session, Timae has been leading with Susan and Maria Paz.  Timae, can you give us a update on that?  Timae?
>> Hi, sorry, having trouble getting off mute.  Can you hear me now?
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: We can hear you, thank you.
>> Yes, sorry about that.  Thanks, so as on the last MAG call I circulated documents that we have been working on with Maria and Susan in the past, actually in June in Berlin I think was the first time we started working on this.  There have been a couple of reactions to that on the list.  Basically, to support the suggestion that the concluding sessions should mirror the Opening Sessions, and I think that is a really good idea.  There was also a suggestion or a question about having to find keynote speakers, like for the closing session, as there are for the Opening Sessions.
We did not plan for that in our original thinking.  And I'm not sure that that is necessary.  But of course, the teams can do that if they so wish.  I think the idea would rather be to make sure to wrap up from the sessions and to help the reporting, so I'm not sure that the keynote speaker is needed for that.
I think that those were the main two comments that I've heard, and I think that the teams have done a good job of planning ahead.  Nothing more on my end but I'm happy to answer any questions.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Timae.  I do think it's time to close on the concluding session, so let me see if there are any comments or questions from the MAG members, and maybe Timae, I could ask you to issue a last call on the MAG list, so if there is anything else that people have questions on, they could get that in.
>> Absolutely.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Doing a slow count to 6.  There has been as you said significant support for mirroring the introductory sessions, and given we are all working on building these narratives and tracking these narratives over the course of the week, I think that makes a lot of sense.  Okay.  So we will do one final last call, I think the expectation is that the final process follows the steps that were suggested and as outlined, because as Timae said, all the comments have actually been in support of that and I think it makes a lot of sense.  So thank you to everybody.  Timae?
>> Sorry, think about a deadline for last call, say end of this week?  Or would people need more time to reflect?
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: I personally think the end of this week would be fine.  This has been in front of us since June off and on, and we have been looking at this particular concluding session format for almost a month now, I think.  I think that's enough time.  There has been significant support from those that followed all this work closely on the mailing list, and again, I think it makes a lot of sense given the MAG's desire to focus on the narrative and track the themes and sub themes over the course of the week.  I think the end of the week is enough time.
>> Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you to everybody that's worked on both the introductory and the concluding sessions and document, and thanks to everybody who's volunteering to support those efforts.  I would encourage all MAG members to look to see what you can do to support the various roles that are open in both the introductory and the concluding sessions.  This would be some of the most important work done over the course of the reporting process.  So we appreciate any support MAG members can give.
Looking to our penultimate agenda item which is updates from the main sessions, again, last time, we treated this as an exception reporting.  We have had updates on a couple of the main sessions, four of them, DCs, NRI, digital cooperation report and the Cybersecurity, just through the rest of the discussions, but are there any substantive updates or requests for support from any of the other organizers of the other main sessions?  I'm going to give this an even longer count, to give everybody the opportunity to jump in.
I do know there was one question from Sylvia, she submitted a report ahead of the meeting, but I think she was still looking for an invitation letter for a senior Government official from New Zealand, Chengetai, if you could look into that.  I don't know if it's too late.  But if   
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, I've looked into that.  I think actually WaiMin is going to do something about that.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: I think Sylvia thinks we are just about to lose the window.  So if we can do something, it should happen very quickly at this point.  She said it is going to be difficult to get the most senior representative.  It is not too late but she needs a letter very very quickly.  WaiMin, if there is something you can do, we would appreciate you getting in touch with Sylvia quickly so we don't lose that speaker.  Did Ben just    Ben has a update in the chat room, saying that he's finalized the moderator.  Fabricio Rothschild and the speaker line up, and there is another question in the chat room about invitation to Minister Christine Lambrecht, to Chengetai.  Maybe you can respond to Jutta.  I'll give you a moment, Chengetai.  Maybe you can respond in the chat room there.  Are there any other requests for help on main session speakers, invitations.  Remind everybody that at the top of the meeting Chengetai asked for all the pre session reports to be completed as well and sent in, that does apply for the main sessions.  Chengetai, anything further for the main sessions, anything that you need to know?  (pause).
Chengetai, I suspect you are still on mute.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: You are quite correct.  Yes, I was on mute talking to myself.  (chuckles).
I sent out the list of people that we have invited from the global south, and also some high level people to the session organizers, and if you, some have responded, and we are getting in touch with those people to see if they are available to be panelists  on that session, and if anybody else needs somebody, I think yes, we should be doing that this week.  It is not just for panelists, if you need a online moderator, etcetera, I think they have volunteered, some of those people have volunteered to fulfill those roles as well.  If you could get back to me this week, that would be good.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Chengetai.  Any additional questions or comments, updates on the main sessions?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: There is Kenta.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Do you have a update?
>> Hello, can you hear me?
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: We can, yes.
>> Thank you, Chair and Chengetai.  Sorry, not able to join the previous MAG meeting, and share any updates.  I don't have many updates.  But as previously shared, confirmation to participate from [inaudible] I've been continuously working together closely with Minister in Japan [inaudible] dialogue last week, and I have to attend both industry session and Government industry session and had to make a short presentation at a Government industry session on behalf of the biggest industry in Japan, both governments [inaudible] to make some inputs to several ministries [inaudible] it seems like that now Japanese Government are passionate about expanding the concept of [inaudible] they would like to speak about it at the main session too and listen to experience from stakeholders.  By the end of this week, as Chengetai mentioned, who you would like to have as speakers, would be grateful if you can propose speaker.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Kenta.  I don't know if the list that Chengetai circulated would be a helpful place to start.  I think you did actually send a list to the MAG of the qualifications you were looking for, or the particular kind of criteria you were looking for.  If not, if you could do that right away, that would help everybody to focus, unless Chengetai, you have some other suggestions on how to support that.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, not at the moment.  I'll get back to you, Kenta.  Thanks.
>> Thank you so much.  Appreciate it.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Kenta.
>> Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Not seeing any other requests for the floor on this particular item.  We did have one AOB request, and that was for an update on Chengetai's trip to Poland, who as you know are the host of the IGF next year.  Chengetai, are you prepared to give an update?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes.  The trip was an assessment mission, so I went there with the person who does the technical, the ICT coordinator, the event security coordinator, also Deniz from DESA, and basically the trip is just to make sure that Poland is ready to host the IGF 2020 meeting, and not to get into too much in details, the results is yes, they are fully ready.  They have got all the political backing that is necessary to host the meeting.  We did take a look at the proposed venue and the proposed venue is more than adequate, and everybody there has got, I will not name the venue but I'm sure you can take a educated guess where the venue is, has the experience from hosting previous UN meetings, so I think everything is fine there.  It's a fairly new venue as well, transportation won't be a problem.  The hotels are very close to the venue.  You can even walk from the nearby hotels to the venue.  The dates, I will not    I know people want the hard facts, when are the dates, what is the venue, etcetera.  But this hasn't been approved yet.  But it will not be during Thanksgiving week.  But sometime in November, I think, but everything is going to be announced at the IGF meeting or even before the IGF meeting, there is already, also for the Host Country Co Chair as well, I think a decision has been made there as well, and that is also going to be announced at the IGF 2019 meeting.
So as far as getting ready to prepare for the meeting, everything is on the ground, all the teams are ready, and I don't think we will have any issues as far as that is concerned.  Sorry for not giving you the specific information that you are looking for.  But we have to wait until the official announcement and decisions have come through.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Chengetai, it is a nice courtesy to not get ahead of the host official announcement so I think that is very wise on your part.  Samuel has a comment in the chat room that I'm not sure I understand.  Is that for this IGF?  I'm guessing.  Can you read the comment in the chat room, Chengetai?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, it's about accommodation.  Yes, the host is providing an accommodation, if you have made arrangements, we will have to go back and see what that is.  You are not obliged to stay in the hotel.  If you want to stay somewhere else, I'm sure you can.  It is a matter of whether or not you will be given the full DSA or not because if we provide accommodation we give half DSA.  So that has to be looked at.  There is another one.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: I'm trying to read it from Maria, regarding participants at high level meeting on Day Zero, and just questions whether or not it's a full list.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: No, the list I sent out was not the participants for Day Zero, if you want the full list of participants invited for Day Zero I'll hand that over to Rudolf to answer.  One thing though, the meeting is open to other participants, and I'll ask from Rudolf to confirm as long as they are seats available in the room, of course.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: I think Rudolf has left the call (overlapping speakers).
>> If I may interrupt, if Rudolf is not there, I will be able to answer that question.  It's Jutta here.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Please, Jutta, yes, I see Rudolf left the call a few moments ago.
>> JUTTA CROLL: The list for high level meeting on day 0 is not yet published, this is because it's not yet finalized, not all people have already confirmed their participation, so it's still in the process of consolidation, nonetheless, I can confirm that the meeting will be open to all other participants, and the rooms where the sessions will take place are huge enough to accommodate also participants to interact with the panelists.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Jutta.  Ben has a question, for you, Chengetai.  Basically whether or not the German Government providing accommodations is for all MAG members or just those MAG members who apply for travel support.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: It's for those MAG members who have provided, it's for those MAG members who are being sponsored, so those ones who are being provided with travel support.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you.  Let me see if there are any other quick AOB items.  I'll let Chengetai take that with you off line, Mary.  If anybody else has any specific questions concerning your accommodations, I think the most sufficient way to do that is take it off line with the Secretariat.  I want to thank everybody for staying with the meetings the last few weeks, I know it's a lot of nitty gritty detail.  Unfortunately this is just the point we are in the process, and it's, you know, really important for making it the best possible IGF or the best IGF ever.
I don't know, Chengetai, you have a view as to whether or not you think we need another MAG meeting ahead of the meeting.  Or if MAG members think we need another one?  I think we are coming down to the end now.  WaiMin, yes, I'll give you the floor in a moment.  Chengetai, maybe you can take a quick minute and think about whether another meeting would be helpful.  We can always even take a request to the MAG list to see if there are any open items in a week's times or something and see if we need a meeting in two three weeks.  Ben is saying he thinks it would be good to have another MAG meeting before we head to Berlin.  We can always tentatively schedule one and put a draft agenda together, and agree and Jutta is agreeing too.  We will go forward with another MAG meeting.  I'll let Chengetai find the optimum time for that.  We will put together an agenda.  Thank you everybody for the quick feedback.  WaiMin you have the floor.
>> Hi, Lynn.  Sorry.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: No problem.
>> Trying to get online.  I'd like to make a quick clarification to what Chengetai just mentioned, in case that there is misunderstanding.  On the MAG travel supporting the accommodations, is really part of the global south Germans have supported, so in other words, for MAG members would be from developing countries, that's one.
Second point is that the arrangement with German host is that you will be at the hotel they provided, if any alternate arrangement would be made, they will not be [inaudible] by the host Government.  Thanks, Lynn.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, WaiMin.  Thank you.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Coming back to the meeting, should we not have it in two weeks time but closer in November, let's give like November 5?  I don't know what people think about that.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: November 5 is probably a good date.  That is still three weeks, ahead of.  The two options would be November 5, or October 29.  The 5th is good.  That is three weeks of IGF for practical purposes.  Although Mary is saying ICANN meeting travels on the first of November.  I don't know if that means it's okay for the 5th or not.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: ICANN meeting is in Montreal if I'm not mistaken.  Correct?
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Right.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: We can see to make it a time that doesn't    no, we can't, actually.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: They are saying many people will be in transit.  The Italian IGF is on the 29th.  Well, we don't need to stay with a Tuesday.  We can move back to the Wednesday, and do it on the 30th even.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: We can do it on the 12th if you want, but that's   
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: That is a little too close.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: I want to give enough time for people to wrap up everything and then we can say by that date we should have everything more or less complete.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Why don't you see if you can find a time to make the 5th work, otherwise I think we default back to maybe the 30th on the Wednesday.  Something like that.  But I leave it to you to look at the various schedules, Chengetai.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Okay.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, everybody, thank you for a good call.  Again, really appreciate everybody staying in with the nitty gritty details too.
>> Thank you very much, Lynn.
>> Thank you, Rajesh.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Have a good morning, afternoon, evening, everybody.  Thank you.
>> Very good idea.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, everybody.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Lynn.  Thank you, everybody.
>> Thank you, Chengetai.

Información de Contacto

United Nations

Secretariat of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF)

Villa Le Bocage

Palais des Nations,
CH-1211 Geneva 10

Switzerland

Tel.: +41 (0) 229 175 778