Dear Gordon, just one remark - RIPE region is not equivalent of EU region at all.
And unfortunately we have issues with involvements from others countries of our region. I think it should be also special point on our agenda. An just - for example - for them it is not one day roundtrip at all. Sometimes it could require some obligations and someone can expect some concrete results from such trips. It is just a fact - but I think that we seriously should discuss how we can outreach the whole region. regards, Dmitry On 11 Dec 2013, at 21:34, Gordon Lennox <[email protected]> wrote: > Let us take a few steps back. ;-) > > When I first started turning up at RIPE - which was a few years ago! - the > attitude was that as the meetings were open anybody who wanted to turn up > could do so. And that obviously included government folk. There may also have > been the feeling that as "the Internet is not regulated" then the need for > involvement with governments was low. > > There has been a definite change regarding that latter point and indeed, as > the recent proposed Regulation and as the "leaked" Communication make clear, > better contact is more and more required. > > In parallel there have been changes in how that contact has been organised. A > particular WG, the Cooperation WG, was set up and NCC organised Roundtables. > > I seem to remember that early roundtables were organised at Schipol to make > it as easy as possible for government people to attend. When even that was > seen to have its limits then the Roundtables were organised in Brussels. From > what I have heard that works. Not only do people from the Commission attend > but also people from other states who either work in Brussels or travel in > for the day. And by the way, picking up on Roland's point, it is probably > more the familiarity of Brussels as a destination than allows people from out > of town to attend rather than the issue of expenses. They can also add in > some side meetings which adds value. So all in all the Roundtables are > appreciated and working. > > There have also been efforts to get people to come to talk to the WG. That > has been perhaps less successful. But we have had Commission staff making > presentations. And perhaps with this fresh start we can bring new ideas. More > on that later. > > The WG though is about people coming together either at RIPE meetings or here > on the mailing list - and not necessarily at a Roundtable. It is about > sharing information and concerns in those two main WG contexts. And when > warranted it is about communicating common views and concerns to others on > behalf of the WG. > > Of course individuals may decide that they have a particular concern and > decide to take it up with their local regulator or government or with the > Commission. It good that people do this. Maybe they could even share their > experiences! > > I think though that it is recognised that there is a problem with small > groups of people or even individuals going to Brussels and claiming to > represent the WG - unless of course there has been discussion and consensus > on the message to be passed. Maybe other people think otherwise. Maybe we > need to discuss this > > I also have a variety of problems with the notion of "free consultancy". I > won't try to cover them all here and now. > > But the Commission spends a lot of money on acquiring information: from > research projects, to studies, to workshops, to consultation processes. So > they are paying people. They are also surrounded by a mass of local lobbyists > all also giving them information. A lot of groups either have offices or > people in Brussels, including ISOC, CENTR and ICANN. So many people in the > Commission probably think they are already getting all the information they > need. So we in turn would need to be clear about the added value and who > would do the work and what process we would use and so on. > > And by the way the Commission has continued to send people, and sometimes > significant numbers of people, to meetings considered more important, such as > ICANN and the IGF. > > So what can be done within the WG to engage with policy makers? > > 1) We now have two co-chairs who have very good knowledge of the Commission. > I think it would be good if the co-chairs wrote seeking a commitment to send > somebody to future meetings - not necessarily always the same person. I think > the scope could include, as appropriate for different meetings, Internet > governance, telecoms regulation, broadband initiatives and research. > > 2) I think it would be useful to expand the scope of those we invite. > Involving local government folk has already proved useful. So who in Poland? > And other organisations. The OECD has done and is doing interesting policy > work. Then we have folk from BEREC and ENISA and the Data Protection agency. > > 3) I think we can also use "proxies". People have said to me that they find > Commission documents "difficult". So why not invite people who have already > analysed them to make a presentation? A good presentation and a good > discussion may encourage people to go back and look again. I would also be > tempted to consider inviting ETNO or GSMA or ETSI. > > 4) Finally I think it would be good to invite other groups to talk about > their policy concerns and what they are doing in that direction. The people > are probably already there. But Euro-IX? CENTR? ISOC? > > This is of course in addition to the excellent feedback we tend to get from > people going to the IGF and the EIF and so on. > > Pause... > > Gordon > > > On 11 Dec, 2013, at 11:08, Roland Perry <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> In message >> <CANeNdN+yL6MQyJw-totvNVf4pMV1ivLy9DXyYRZE8b9=hcd...@mail.gmail.com>, at >> 21:45:53 on Tue, 10 Dec 2013, Alain Van Gaever <[email protected]> writes >>> Next to the RIPE NCC Roundtable, there might also be value to actually go >>> and talk to the officials in Brussels who prepare the legislative texts. >>> From experience I would argue that those are NOT necessarily the same >>> people as those who attend the RIPE NCC Roundtable meetings >> >> That's right, the Roundtables are more for invitation-only "Heads of >> Department", who are also the people who can more easily arrange to spend a >> day out of the office 'on expenses'[1]. >> >> I never organised a Roundtable in Brussels, but it would make sense to me >> that it should be slightly more of an 'open house' for local officials. >> >> Perhaps the date for the Roundtable has been chosen as the day after an EIF >> meeting, so there might be more industry folks in town that day too. >> >> [1] The difficulty of which is often much underestimated, and is a major >> reason for poor attendance at a 2hr RIPE-WG session in an 'exotic' >> location. >> -- >> Roland Perry >> > >
