Okoli, I believe the problem that we have here, is that it is perceived that the NRS does not have the greatest reputation within the community. To my knowledge of NRS' members, there are very few (if any at all) that reside within the APNIC service region as the NRS appears to only show activities that have taken place within the African continent (and in turn the AFRINIC service region) and there is no member list on the NRS website (except for a few "major members"). This makes me wonder, what is the point of the NRS for endorsing someone in a region in which they have few to no members? If there are indeed proud members of the NRS within the APNIC service region, I would encourage them to come forward (off-list is ok) so that we at least know that such members do exist.
It is also common courtesy for an organisation to contact the person they are endorsing, to let them know that they are being endorsed. Tell me - did the NRS contact Kams before they endorsed him? To discuss the NRS' priorities in the "manifesto" 1. "A strong champion for community - led bottom-up governance" - This section states that the NRS believes that APNIC should operate with a bottom-up system of accountability with members involved in discussions and decision-making processes. This is already the case, as clearly demonstrated in APNIC's by-laws. The EC also made it substantially easier for members to make changes to the by-laws by changing the number of votes required from 2/3 of the membership to 2/3 of votes cast. 2. "Ensure the executive team of APNIC is held accountable to members" - Again, already the case. The EC is made up of individuals who are not employees of APNIC (save the Director-General in his ex-officio role) and as a result do not receive a wage/salary/remuneration for their work as an EC member, allowing for reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses and costs to be covered for executing their duties. The EC are directors of APNIC Pty Ltd and in turn, if they determine that actions being taken by the Secretariat are not in-line with the values of APNIC then they have the ability to question this. To my knowledge, this has never happened and the Secretariat operate with the highest regard for transparency and accountability. 3. "Ensure that APNIC membership funds are well spent and managed" - The EC is responsible for setting fees as well as the budget for the Secretariat. As I've also mentioned previously, APNIC's budget, Annual Reports and Financial Reports are available for anyone to view on https://www.apnic.net/about-apnic/transparency/ along with a independent auditor report (as well as their independence declaration). 4. "Support APNIC to become carbon neutral by 2030" - I do not know enough about APNIC's carbon neutrality plans to make a meaningful comment so I will leave this for someone else to make a comment on. 5. "Champion a free market, where businesses are free to run unhindered" - What is the NRS' definition of a "free market"? I note that you mentioned that "APNIC and all RIRs should not be controlled by any government" which I would like to clarify. APNIC is not "controlled" by any local, state or federal government of Australia. While it is an entity based in Australia, it is subject to the laws of Australia. The same could be said if APNIC were incorporated in New Zealand as an example, it would be subject to the laws of New Zealand. The Australian Government does not dictate how APNIC must conduct its operations any more than any other entity of Australia in the sense that APNIC must collect Goods & Services Tax from Australian members, requirements for APNIC Pty Ltd to have at least one resident director, etc. NRS' vision in the manifesto makes no sense. Governance is already community-led, APNIC already adopts a bottom-up approach for policy development, and members already have the ability to amend by-laws (as was demonstrated in a spectacular fashion during APNIC 56 in Kyoto). SIG chairs receive no financial remuneration for their work as SIG chairs and are as a result deemed independent from the Secretariat, anyone can draft and submit a policy proposal, anyone is welcome to attend APNIC meetings, and anyone is welcome to become a member. Further, the Secretariat does not have a definitive vote in what policies or by-laws are enacted. I do not know why the NRS is calling for community-led bottom-up governance to be restored if this is already happening (and in an excellent way may I add). One thing that I do agree with you on, is that members should exercise their right to vote. They are free to vote for whoever they choose and I actively encourage all members to vote, regardless of whoever it is they wish to vote for. Regards, Christopher Hawker
_______________________________________________ APNIC-talk - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
