2019 IGF - MAG - Virtual Meeting - XII (RAW)

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: Good evening, afternoon, morning, ladies and gentlemen.

  We're about to start virtual MAG meeting Number  XII.  As you know, the meeting is being recorded, transcribed, and a summary report will come out.  In a couple of days after this meeting.

  We'll be using the speaking queue, and the link to the speaking queue, it is going to be put into the chat room now by Luis.

  Thank you, Luis.

  With that, I'll hand it over to Lynn to start the meeting.

  >> Sorry.  This is Luis, it seems like -- that  Ling has not yet joined --

  >> I see the microphone is not on yet.

  >> Let's give her a minute.  One minute.

  >> Sure.

  >> Can you hear me now?

  >> Yes, we can.  It works with the Safari browser, not Firefox.

  Thank you, Luis.

  Are we ready to start?  Do you think there are others still trying to join?

  >> Sorry, Lynn --

  >> We'll start that again.

  >> I had handed it over to you, Lynn.  Over to  you, Lynn, to start the meeting.

  >> Lynn:  All right, thank you.

  Apologies, everybody, I joined via Firefox browser but it wasn't -- the audio was not working properly there.  Good morning, food goon, good evening.  Thank you for joining in.  I know this is a pretty heavy holiday period in many parts of the world.

  We have got some very important work to do with respect to the main session planning by and large.

  There was a meeting last week with some individuals from the German mission in New York along with participants, two main meetings, one on kind of reporting, some additional discussions on some of the opening ceremonies, that sort of thing, and then there was a meeting with individuals from the Secretary-General's office with respect to digital cooperation.  I think we'll hit those updates at the two appropriate points in the Agenda.  The one on digital cooperation will hit and we'll actually get to the -- to what was called the frontier session, the main session, we'll talk about some of the developments there, and then the reporting under that Agenda Item as well.

  I think in general, it was a really good meeting, we were taking advantage of Rudol ph being in the U.S. for a kind of tour, I don't think he was able to join us by I think we have Baron on the call if I'm -- if I'm correct.

  We can give -- or Rudolph if he's on the call, he can give a follow-up update in a moment.  They were useful meetings, successful meetings, I thank them for taking the time while in New York to keep things moving along.

  With that, I turn it back to you for an update on the Secretariat and then an update from the Host Country.

  You have th floor.

  >> As most of you know, I did send out the schedule last week for people to look at to see if there's any clashes, I set a deadline for yesterday evening.  So there have been a couple of people who have reported back with clashes and double bookings for speakers.  We'll look at those in the next couple of days, and we'll republish the schedule, hopefully by the end of the week and that should be more or less set then, the schedule.

  The idea and logistics have been published, they're on the website and you see the link for the input documents for this meeting and also the bilateral rooms can be reserved now so you can start reserving them from now rain we're reserving them in one-hour spots.

  As you know, travel support was closed on the 30th of June and the secretary is sorting out the applications and consulting with the national, regional initiatives, as to who should be on the top of the list and we'll then consult with New York and also the Host Country and come up with a list, hopefully by the end of this month and then we can start informing people and start making travel arrangements for the November meeting in good time for people.

  I think that is -- that's the updates unless I missed something out.

  I'll give Luis and Anya a chance to say something in case I missed something.

  >> Nothing from this side.

  >> Thank you.

  >> Okay.  Thank you.

  Back to you, Lynn.

  >> This is Murray.

  Sorry, I should have used the speaking queue.  I'm sorry.

  >> Go ahead.

  >> I just want (Murray) to talk about the duration of -- I discovered that the Agenda, it is just one  hour, is that what we had done?

  >> The open forums have been one hour for the last couple of years.

  >> Murray:  Okay.  Thank you.

  >> Thank you, Mary.  Thank you.

  >> In my haste to get the meeting started as I had difficulties joining I skipped the formal adoption of the Agenda.  The Agenda has been out for two weeks now and what we would like to do, norm at the at the top of the meeting is approve, adopt the Agenda and at the same time also ask if there are any requests for any other business.

  Let me just do that just now.  Are there any other business topics?  AOB.

  And are there any objections to approving the Agenda?

  Yes, Mary, you have the floor.

  >> Mary:  Yes.  I couldn't see --

  >> Good point.    it is not there.

  I see they're on the call, if not, I'll update on the meetings last week as I said earlier in the appropriate points in the Agenda.  We'll come to that as the next order of business, Mary.  Thank you, thank you for pointing that out.

  No additions?  No objections to moving forward with the Agenda as approved?

  Okay.  Then let's move forward and let me say, scanning the participants quickly, I do not see  Rudolph, I do see Heiki and I didn't see Baro had n, any specific update you would like to provide.

  >> Can you hear me?

  >> We can, yes.

  >> I have no --

  >> Lynn:  No.  Sorry.  I cannot -- you're right.

  There is also Heike from the German mission as well that was with us last week, I couldn't see the last name.  Thank you.

  >> Sorry!

  >> That's fine.  Thank you.

  It doesn't seem as though there is anyone from the Host Country.

  Chengetai, the planning continues with respect to the various sessions, parliamentary sessions, obviously the opening ceremony, which is shared between the United Nations and the Host Country, as well as the high-level leaders session.  We expect for the hue I Level leader session and the parliamentariy session to have a full update at the end of this month or early August.  Everything is pretty much proceeding to plan and the current expectations a the this moment with respect to the high-level leader forum is that there would be sort of breakout groups associated with the three main themes in the IGF 2019 and possibly one kind of additional more visionary speaker or topic possibly focused on fragmentation of the Internet.  We really moved away from one Internet, something of that nature.

  Again, they will have a full report at the end of the month or early August on both the high-level leader meeting and the parliamentarian session.  If there are any specific questions perhaps the Secretariat or I could answer them, if not, we'll ensure that the Host Country is aware of them and gets an update to the MAG.  We just will see if there are any specific questions.

  Mary, you are in the queue, I'm not sure if that's an old hand or a new one.

  >> Mary Uduma:  It is a new one.

  Just a reaction and clarification on what was being said about the parliamentarian session and the high-level session, since the Host Country is not around, will you be able to know when they'll send out the letters of invitation?  Again, will MAG members be copied so we can follow-up in our communities.

  >> Lynn:  I'll ask Chengetai to help here, I believe most of the letters have gone out, if there were specific people that should be invited, you should either get in touch with Rudolph or I think the Secretariat can provide the appropriate contact point with the mission in New York as I was understanding was helping with the invitations.

  Chengetai, you have anything to add or correct?

  >> Chengetai (Speaker) yes.  If I recall  correctly, the letters for the Ministers have gone out.  But I don't think the letters for the parliamentarians have gone out.

  I'm a little bit hazy on the selection process of the parliamentarians, I don't think the individual letters have gone out.  If, as you said, Lynn, if you have specific parliamentarians whom you think should be approached please just send us an email and we'll compile them and forward them to the Host Country.  I think that would actually help us.

  This is for the parliamentarians.

  >> Lynn:  Thank you, it Chengetai.

  It was difficult to copy MAG members because they're following the Diplomatic channels and -- Chengetai (Speaker) yes.  Exactly.

  They would rather keep within the Diplomatic channels and not have people from out vied of to the channels helping out you can help out by giving us the names and we'll send letters directed at those people if we don't have anybody else in that country identified.  Yes.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you, Chengetai,.  Thank you, Mary, for an excellent Question.  Any questions that we don't have the information here, we'll follow-up with Rudolph and get back to the MAG.

  Not seeing -- let's see.  Sylvia just posted a comment, it will be great to know a bit more about the parliamentarians, if the letters were sent and if the names we suggested which were included which is similar to Arsene's comment as well.

  Chengetai, perhaps you can take that up with the the Host Country to see if we can get a list or share the specific requests?

  >> CHENGETAI: Yes, I'll do that and then send an update.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you.  That's a very good point,  Arsene, about involving them in the RNI activities as well.  That's a really critical point.   .

  Chengetai said he will follow-up and we'll continue to work that set of communications.

  The next item on the main session discussions, and not quite sure how we want to move forward.  We have clarified since the last meeting that in fact there are six main sessions and the NRI and the DC plus what was previously called the frontier issues that I think we're now thinking about calling -- what did we decide, Chengetai?  Digital cooperation, Internet governance, something?  Referring to the placeholder, that's a had place where we would actually work to advance the digital cooperation report which was the output from the High-Level Panel on digital cooperation.

  Let me just move -- sorry, Chengetai, go ahead.

  >> CHENGETAI: That's fine.

  We'll update the schedule with the full name so you will have it by the end of the week, yes.

  >> CHAIR: Let's move through them.  We'll go through the order of the document which was included as the supporting documents for this call, the first one, it is using shorthand since there are a couple of suggestions for the titles, Human Rights and Internet governance topic, I'm not sure who wants to walk us through an update.

  Again, we want to keep the main session planning moving forward.  I know it is a heavy holiday period in some parts of the world, but we need to keep this moving forward over the course of the next two months to allow adequate prep time and certainly to allow invitations to get out to the key speakers.  If we could all make an effort to both continue driving it, if you're one of the leaders or coleaders, also as a MAG member that you look through the documents that the individual working groups are submitting to ensure maximum clarity and impact from the sessions as well as if you have any speaker suggestions as well I'm sure group leaders would appreciate that as well.

  Is there someone that's prepared to give us an update on the Human Rights and Internet governance main session.

  Chengetai, can the Secretariat tell us what the current state is or -- I know -- I'm not sure they're up to date, it says the description work is to be completed and policy questions to be completed.  I'm not sure if that's from our MAG meeting or if that's a more recent update.  Looking at the schedule that was part of the meeting documents which has merged topics, possible titles and group notes.

  >> Lynn, I was trying to put my name on the speaking queue but for some reason, it is not loading.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you.

  >> Sorry about that.

  This is the content governance session, I'm not sure if it is the one that you just mentioned because you said Internet governance and Human Rights and that's kind of like a different thing.  I got a little bit confused.

  >> CHAIR: It is this one.  Right.  The possible title says Human Rights, respect in a world of ever quicker adoption of Internet Governance and challenge for good policymaking, content platform, those are the three possible titles.  We need to -- I think we need to settle on a session title for that.

  >> Again, sorry.  I have no idea where those titles are coming from.  We agreed on this title in Berlin.  Maybe there is something else and I wasn't a part of the report for the last time, I only arrived a little bit late to the last MAG call, I may be a little bit confused.

  I can give you the update we have so far.

  >> CHAIR: That's good.

  You're right.  There does seem to be -- I have the title that's showing in the chat room, it is in fact noted under group notes.  Maybe we just need to all of us update these forms so we make sure that we're working from the current titles.  Yes.  This is the same session.  Thank you for providing us with an update.


  >> Thank you.

  The proposal is on the screen.  Thank you for sharing the link also for those that conditional handle two screens.

  We have had a call last week, and we -- the group decided to have three coorganizers, I don't see them on the list of participants, that's why I'm jumping in here to give the update.

  The mailing list, it is linked on the document.  We have followed the template from last year and the guidelines so far with only one small change.

  We -- we added a brief description of 200 words and then the full description because it might be too short to actually cover all the discussion that the group is trying to structure.

  So we are -- this is a bit more of the brief description that covers some of the paragraphs below before we start chopping, let's say, text.

  Basically the session, it is structured around the issues dealing with content governance, grouping the policy questions, the Agenda, the speakers, everything around the rights, responsibility, responses and risks.  Rights, of course, the Human Rights aspect to it, and the rest of the session will follow under all of those -- the four Rs, let's say.

  The idea, it is to focus on one or mostly, you know, the harmful content that's related to hate speech and vie vent extremism and also to touch on everything under this, in terms of what is harmful content.  Examples on the session, they're very targeted.

  If someone can move the document a little bit lower, please?

  The next page?

  So then the session, as I mentioned, it is structured on the rights, responsibilities, responses and risks, so on the rights, the idea is that to understand what is the human Ritz framework in which harmful speech and violent extremism plays, right, so who might be the laws, agencies, those that are dealing with these issues and how they operate to understand what influence in terms of policy this response will take.

  Then under responsibilities, it is around who -- where the responsibility lies, if there is regulations in place, if the regulators are holding those or the content holders, the platforms accountable, and what each of those are doing, it is part of the responses section.

  And in the risk, -- so in terms of responses, it could be responses from all the different stakeholders, not only governments, we'll explain that in the next page.

  On the risks, the risks, not only the risks are about -- the risk of the harmful content, which we  know, but certain risks are out there, but the risks for the process to those issues on content.  Right.  So if for example there is not enough consultation, there is a risk for that.  If the response is too hasty or doesn't take into account all of the stakeholders -- I don't know.  It is to discuss around those possible risks.

  If you move to the next page?

  Then we have grouped the policy questions that we originally had, again, to rights, responsibilities, responses and risks.  There are a lot of questions, as you can see, we still haven't separated those into shorter versions of those if needed.  We think that, of course, not all the speakers will not be able to answer all of those questions, so one of the suggestions and ideas of the people that are working on this proposal, it was to -- like a list of the policy questions, the questions, the research questions that people should ask to assess the type of response that they're giving to this particular risk and to see if they are targeting or taking account Human Rights frameworks, the responsibilities as laid out by the law and what is the type of response that they are achieving and then what are the risks of those responses.

  The idea, it is to have as part of the outcomes of the session, like a guideline of those questions that people can go with instead of just deleting question, keeping all of the questions that we have got and maybe even ask for more to try to cluster them and see how wide we can understand.

  If you can move to the next page.

  Then we have the Agenda, again, divided into similar blocks.

  The first one, it is a small, brief introduction that we'll explain what the session is about, of course, how is it structured, introduce the speakers and give also the tips around the speak speaking  queues, and then the hashtags, whatever, then the fist block, rights and responsibilities, probably there will be 3, 4 speakers and that will bring the context and background around those two issues and it could be -- we haven't gone that far as to deciding on names but some names are being discussed so probably in the next week or so we'll have that information.

  On the responses and risk, we have -- that session will have information about the analysis of, okay, how do you respond to that?  Of course, responses will be perfect if you have enough time, if you don't have the pressure to resolve, things like that.  It will be about in reality how that happens and then there will be three examples there, the first one will be on how the government action is structured, the second one, it will look at the industry, the platforms, the content and how they are taking actions by themselves and how they respond.

  In between these parts, there will be Q&A interaction.

  If you can move to the next page.

  This last thing is ideas for the future, this is a conversation about all of the speakers, the three speakers from the first block we talked about, rights and responsibilities, and the three speakers will share examples on responses and risks and then discussing on the future, how that will work and then again at the end, in the Q&A part that will be a part of after each of the blocks, there will be a Q&A..

  We asked organizers to take the Rapporteur role and then Jordan from New Zealand has offered his name as moderator and we started to discuss the names for speakers in the two big blocks and then the plan for the engagement and interaction as well as the remote participation and the desired outcomes are still kind of like a work in progress.

  So in the mailing list we have a doc that if you give me your email and addresses, I'll send the direct link there.  In this this one, you can view only.

  So if you want to add comments or make  suggestions, you can participate in the mailing list and send us that email.

  That's so far the update.  The last about it, it is that as part of the outcomes, besides that list of questions that could be a guiding tool for people when they're assessing, figuring out what their responses should look like, that is one.  Then to that, we're working on a table mapping the kind of responses had that are out there, trying to figure out which ones come from industry and which ones come from government, which ones come from community and how they kind of play together.

  So as far as we have gone, we still have a lot of work to do, and if you want to participate, suggest names with the speaker, please send your suggestions to the mailing list and we'll look at those and discuss them.

  That's it.

  Thank you.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you, Sylvia.  That was a thorough update.

  Carlos, you have the floor.

  >> Carlos:  Thank you.  Good morning, everyone.  From Brazil's point of view!.

  I find that the proposal is excellent.  Congratulations to the group.

  I would try to empathize the idea of community participation, I hope we'll be able to do that in the debate in the main session.  Facebook, for instance, has been fined 5 billion euro I think from the European Union and if you think that they could use 1% or 0.1% of amounts like that to stimulate community participation into discussions of policies regarding the platforms, it would be very tremendous.

  I think we have to insist on trying to propose concrete steps for stronger, much stronger participation of the community in their policies.

  This and the proposal, of course, it considers that, very good.

  Thank you.

  >> Sylvia:  Thank you, Carlos.  I appreciate the feedback.  We're taking notes for the group.  Thank  you.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you, Carlos.

  Is there anyone else that wants to comment.

  Sylvia, I don't think it was too long at all.  It was a thorough briefing which is important.  These are really important sessions, and they're important for advancing significant pieces of work.

  I think you're -- you're calling out the critical points.

  I will just give people another moment for any further comments, if they want to add.

  Maybe just one suggestion, maybe this is something for the template, as part of the last item, with I, you know, focuses on the future items and the desired results throughout the possible next steps for the  work, I think I would encourage everybody as they go through the planning to think about who else ought to be engaged and to what end or for what piece of the discussion.

  That would help us in terms of identifying other speakers, given that we have all had a long-standing desire to broaden our outreach.

  Also, perhaps ways to kind of advance the topic overall by identifying other helpful pieces of work that may take place in other organizations, which is, of course, Part of the Tunis Agenda and supports the Secretary-General's request for broader outreach and certainly for multidisciplinary extension to our work as well.

  As we progress through the main session planning, as we think about what are kind of the desired output, who are some of the other participants or organizations that would be very useful in terms of helping to advance the work to the extent we can identify and invite them in, that would be a good vision to the template.

  You have the floor.

  >> Jutta Croll:  Thank you for giving me the  floor, thank you to Sylvia who has give a very precise presentation of what we had discussed in the group.

  There is one thing I wanted to underline with regard to the last question you have put, that is that during deliberations on the session we really worked the policy questions, it is not the objective of the session or main session to get answers to all of these policy questions we have raised.  Not only because that's not possible in the timeframe, but because the objective would be that these policy questions itself were a take away for participants in the session..

  If we have policymakers in the session, and we're able to achieve that we can put a focus on the selection of these policy questions, say these are the most pressing ones and this is something that you should take with you back to your own work and try to answer these questions in your work, that's as much of an achieved goal I would say as having answers to the policy questions.  So policy questions play a crucial role also in themselves as a take away from the session and I do think this could also be the case for other main sessions.  That's why I'm trying to empathize the load on the policy questions a the this point.   .

  Thank you.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you.  Jutta, good comments as  well.

  Something I often thought, if we look at the IGF and the IGF community, one of the broadest if not the broadest multistakeholder community that comes together on these issues, to the extent we can identify a framework for advancing these issues, either by to your point, the way you have all split out the right response, risk, policy questions within them, to the extent you can say these are critical pieces of what they need to be advanced in order for all of us to, you know, better advance the Tomic overall, anything that was -- I'm trying to find a word that would work.

  It was kind of advice, in not -- in not directive, not direction, but it would be helpful if this question was answered in an appropriate place or vehicle or structure or process or organization to manage that, it could be why it could be helpful.  It helps to put an overall frame across the work, hopefully it helps work advance, it is not repetitive work, redundant, but all working within some kind of larger framework to the extent we can continue to work towards that, I think that the facts of some of these, they're very complex, intertwined nuanced topics that could be advanced.  So just fairly supportive of the work that the Working Group is doing here in terms of the approach and advancing that.

  You have the floor..

  >> Yes.  Can you hear me?

  >> CHAIR: We can, yes.

  >> Okay.  So I'll try to explain a bit of what we have done so far about the Artificial Intelligence main session (Concettina Cass.  A.

  We had a virtual meeting last week and we decided to change the title to give more to the Human Rights, now it is applying Human Rights and ethics in responsible data governance and Artificial  Intelligence.  We actually filled in the the form relating to the session and we're still working on  that.  We'll maybe have a firm update in the next meeting.

  Actually we have elaborated a brief description about the main session, Artificial Intelligence, trying to focus on the data governance from one side and also from all other as packets related.

  In the brief description, we actually -- I went from one side, data protection, all of the issues related to that data governance, from the other side, we actually point out also that the discussion should be focused also on the transparency, the  accountability, and so on.

  Also, on the need to have a monitoring by humans when taking decisions because Artificial Intelligence cannot -- especially when you're dealing with humans.

  So about the format, we decided to have a parallel discussion, and we also think that two moderators would be enough to handle the session and we also are thinking to reach some reference related to the Artificial Intelligence that's ongoing as the European Commission, so many other initiatives, so we think that involving this reference in the session, it could be a good idea.

  About the policy professional, we actually, we think -- we selected five policy discussions, you can see on the screen.  I don't know if -- I don't know if it is displayed.  The policy question we choose, it is about Best Practices, Best Practices, we want to understand what are the Best Practice, Human Rights with governance, and we also think it is important also to discuss about responsible governance and the ecology design as a predicate to Human Rights as part of Artificial Intelligence and we think it is important to discuss about the role of regulation issues and in particular, Artificial Intelligence, and also to discuss about the need to have an ethical framework to regulate the data and look at the Artificial Intelligence algorithms.

  Also, we think it is important to understand K data governance, Artificial Intelligence complex.

  We also discussed, we didn't have a clear idea, so far we're thinking about all the other speakers to invite, maybe we'll decide in the next one, also we're trying to understand how to connect the main session to the BPF workshop because we think they should be connected and be involved in some way.

  About the results, we think we need concrete actionable -- there are so many initiatives that are working on the Artificial Intelligence, maybe we can try to do something like the call for -- the call for trust that was being launched last year so we will discuss and review an update next week.

  Thank you.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you, Jutti.

  We'll see if there are any questions.  That was a comprehensive overview.  Thank you.  Thank you to the group for all of the work.

  I'm sure the group would appreciate any suggestions on speakers or other organizations and entities to engage in as well.  We'll give a moment for further comments.  If not, we'll move to the next session.

  We'll take the opportunity to point out, all of the working sessions, the links to join them, they're online, so if you would like to follow the work, contribute to the work, there is an opportunity to join there.

  Let's go up, following the list from our Working Group, from the physical MAG meeting, multidisciplinary frameworks for policymaking,.

  >> Ben Wallace:  Thank you.

  So I sent an email to the MAG list yesterday my time.

  There has been a small change since then I can already announce, that I'll be joined by a coorganizer, so we'll get together after today's MAG call and talk further and there have been some comments on the document overnight from Marii and from Jennifer..

  We have two coorganizers.  A thing to note, particularly for the Secretariat as it develops, the schedule, with a small chain to the title, so that it talked about multidisciplinary policy fake works, pleural, rather than the singular, which will allow for what I hope for in the sex to hear about different ideas and approaches so that there is more than one.

  I believe, yes, I can see that the document is being presented on the screen.

  As others have done, we have used the template.  There is something in almost every session of the template.  It is certainly not complete yet and we're -- forks, we're certainly missing ideas about  moderators and Rapporteurs, but I think it is fairly good progress in completing the template document.

  We have a brief description and it really boils down to how to address the challenge of posturing policymaking approaches that can go beyond working in silos and get the involvement of other experts and participants that are not normally involved.

  We have an Agenda that split the general session into two parts, a shorter, more introductory session about the what and the why.  What is multidisciplinary policymaking and why is it important, what benefits can it bring, and then the longest session on Part two, it is how, how can it be done, what specific approaches could be taken, what mechanisms should be put in place?  Hopefully we have some examples, we certainly have examples of conceptual frameworks and it would be great if we could find some examples of actual multidisciplinary innovative policymaking in action.

  Policy questions, looking at those kinds of  issues, what would be the -- which is stakeholders, what disciplines should be considered to enable the approaches to be truly multidisciplinary, and what is the underlying parts of the multidisciplinary  approaches.  We have not yet a Chair or a moderator suggested, but if I go through the ideas of speakers, maybe there is also a moderator idea.  We have identified a number of relevant initiatives in this area and suggested that they could each be used to provide a speaker to talk to those initiatives.  So one is the digital KWAOP operation -- the high-level digital recommend men takings, they have a high-level recommendation about -- it is a recommendation for -- about the need for cooperation and regulation that's adaptive, Agile, inclusive, so that could be an interesting reason to have a representative of the panel, a speaker to talk about that recommendation, I'm aware the panel has been disbanded and that currently for the Secretary-General for strategic coordination has sort of taken ownership of following up on the initial report.

  I wonder whether he may be a speaker, or whether perhaps given that the high-level panel has made a high-level recommendation, but it has not gone in the details as others have, that maybe he would make a good moderator.  I don't know him and these are just initial ideas.

  I see a role there for the recommendation that came out of the High-Level Panel.  I will also be interested to hear about the separate main session on the high-level panel report and frontier issue and how that may overlap and how it may inform the way that we include that particular high-level panel recommendation within our main session on multidisciplinary policy frameworks.

  Other initiatives, lending themselves to speakers, in the G20 Ministerial Declaration on trade and Digital Economy, last month there was a section about Agile and flexible policy approaches, I wonder about inviting Japanese government which hosted that ministerial to come and talk and I can follow-up with that to see about that, the body that's done maybe the most amount, most detailed thinking about the scenarios, the OECD that spent the last couple of years working on a going digital project which included a toolkit for  governments and regulators talking about how to put together integrated policy framework and particularly interested in strengthening digital government, so I would like to reach out to the OECD and see how they might be involved, I think that's particularly relevant initiative for this main session.  Going down the list, I talked and others have as well, about a policy put out by the International Chamber of Commerce setting out potential approach to developing policy frameworks to make sure that when you develop policy that you consider different considerations such as economic policy considerations, social and culture, technical policy considerations, governance policy  considerations, so I'm sure that we could get a representative of the ICC to come along and give a private sector perspective.  Those are all private sectors so far, in terms of Civil Society, on one hand, there is the potential of deliver active democracy and drib active polling to involve citizens directly in the Internet debates and policymaking so I was certainly aware of the first global citizen debate this year and to publish the results at the IGF this year.  That could be a good idea.

  Also I'm aware that the starred University center for drib active democracy itself back in 2015 before my time with the IGF, it carried out a pilot within the IGF on deliberate polling and governance.  Those are two things you can look at directly and separately -- I'm kind of -- kind of live bloging here, because I'm -- I could -- I could -- I -- people are adding suggestions as I speak.  There is a Stafford digital policy incubator, global policy digital, it is the social progress company that works to find ways to facilitate engagement by public interest actors, and there is research by ICT Africa, based in South Africa as a multidisciplinary evidence based policymaking across Africa.  Thank you to anonymous donors who offered that last suggestion.

  Yeah.  This is -- so I'm very grateful that people are starting to engage with the document and adding ideas, even as we speak.

  I'll stop there and invite comments from others.  Particularly Maria as my coorganizer and anyone else that wants to ask questions oar provide ideas.

  Thank you.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you for a thorough update.

  Let miso if there is anything to add and if not we'll go to Sylvia in the queue.  Maria.

  Maria says no additional comments in the chat  room.  Sylvia, you have the floor.

  >> Sylvia Cadena:  I have a question on the Chair and guidelines.  I think Ben also mentioned, and we tried to figure it out, like last year, we didn't have Chairs for local host Chair or a Chair really that applied last year for the main sessions, and in the guidelines that we did an update, there were no very much instructions or details on what the Chair for the main session actually does.

  Maybe something for the Secretariat or for you to help us, from previous years, trying to figure out how this role is taken, I think probably all the main sessions will kind of struggle a little bit with that and just to thank you, Ben, for the proposal, it is quite interesting to see.

  >> CHAIR: Sylvia, you have been fading in and out a little bit.  It sounded like the comments -- we'll take up to the requests for additional clarification with the Secretariat and turn it around as quickly as we can.

  >> CHENGETAI: We have not had a question on the Host Country to main the sessions, we have done that to give the Host Country advisability, but we'll just confirm with Germany to see whether or not they would require that.  It was usually to give the Host Country more visibility in the sessions.

  >> If I could please -- (coming in and out) in the case of last year, we actually incorporated a speaker from France in the main session that we were  organizing, there was no role for local Chair, so I just -- it would be great to clarify.  It will change the count, let's say, of how many speakers, all of  that, just to make sure that we're tackling diversity and roles and all of that --

  >> Chen (Speaker) I don't think it is being considered this year but we'll confirm.

  >> CHAIR: Chengetai, maybe engage the Working Group that pulled together the main guidelines as well to see what thoughts they had.  I would like to echo I think it was earlier comments with respect to community engagement, we have said for every session at the IGF, we are to set aside 50% of the session time to engage with the participants there online and I would like to just echo those points from earlier and it may be a consideration with respect to how we sort of Chair and moderate these sessions as well.

  >> CHENGETAI: That's true.  I think -- we haven't had Host Country Chairs for basically since last three years, if I'm not mistaken.

  We'll just confirm.

  I don't think they'll.

  Could back.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you..

  I know we're a little bit over time but this is a really important checkin point on the main sessions.  I would like to give all the time that we need to the main sessions and we can pick up any Agenda items which we may not get to in the -- may not get to today in the next meeting.

  What I would like to do now is follow on with an update from the discussions with New York with respect to the digital cooperation and frontier issues since Ben mentioned it several times in his report, and then we have the German government that's joined us, and he's prepared to give a brief update on the parliamentarian sessions and we'll come to him afterwards.

  Then I would like to ask the NRI and DC organizers to speak, inserting them in the middle of the session rather than at the end and then we'll continue to work through the -- that leaves us with three, four other main session items if people are okay with that.

  We mentioned earlier, the Host Country presence in the United States, we had a series of meetings in New York, quite an extensive meeting with representatives from the Secretary-General's office focused on digital cooperation and the take away from that is certainly for the team, they'll continue to work with digital cooperation activities going forward and they're very eager to have a real in-depth discussion on the digital cooperation report at IGF 2019 in Berlin.

  The whole approach to the digital cooperation report, it is fish fairly light handed, but there will be a Secretariat, probably a staff of two that will be led by the office and two others, they're expecting for many of the chapters, that the organizations that have sort of the significant role in the activities, that they step up and take actions within current mandates.  For instance, a number of items, suggestions, they deal with Human Rights, he would look at those entities or organizations that are engaged in Human Rights activities in the United Nations to pick up and run with suggestions or comments and that's from the actual report that's happening to a large degree across many of the topics.  With respect to Internet governance and recommendation 5A, digital cooperation, that, of course, is the one that they're particularly interested in having an in-depth discussion at the IGF.

  There are very interested, excited, supportive requests work being done ahead of time so that the discussion is advanced during the IGF and not, you  know, that we basically take these four, five months and simply go forward with the IGF with a discussion on the report.  I think to many that would not feel like an appropriate enough interaction in the interim.

  In discussions with them, and in subsequent discussions with Desa and the Secretariat last week, we'll be initiating an online consultation that will be largely focused on recommendation 5A, global digital cooperation and the IGF plus the possible architecture and of course, the full report, it will be posted and is open for consultation or comments as well.  There is a lot of other good ideas, good suggestions, good material in the report.

  So a small a team comprised of Rudolph and others from the German Host Country, myself, Secretariat and  Desa is looking at that consultation and the specific launch and we'll use that as a kicking off point to structure the -- what was previously called the frontier issue section and it will be titled something like Internet governance and digital cooperation or -- I thought we came up with a better title but it is escaping me at the moment.  It really deserves more thought as well.

  So that's -- so that's where we are.

  Again, the Secretary-General's office is putting together a very light weight coordination group.  They're expecting kind of individual initiatives from organizations and entities that have a role in the many suggestions or recommendations that were in to the report, they'ric looing for a substantive discussion at the IGF in had Berlin, specifically focused on recommendation 5A in the IGF plus possible  architecture.

  And the lead for that, it will be the Mag Chair Host Country, the Secretariat and Desa.  And we'll put together some more information on that as soon as we have the consultation launched.

  Let me see if there are -- is there anything from the Host Country that you want to add to that, if there are any other comments, questions, additions from MAG members.

  Chengetai, anything you want to add?

  >> CHENGETAI: No.  I think you have covered it quite well.

  Not seeing any other requests.  Again, all of this happened at the very end of last week.  Our focus right now, it is getting the online consultation prepared and launched and then they will put our efforts to organizing this main session and obviously follow the main template and process determined by the MAG.

  We'll take a quick pause and Baron from the Host Country has joined us.  I think we'll go to the par men tear Yan sessions and move to that and then come back to the main session reports from the NRIs and the DCs.

  You have the floor.

  Luis, can you just help -- we can hear you now.  Yes.

  >> He's on vacation, regarding the main session, it they're working, the German parliament and others on that session, and our President, the President of the German parliament is invited, the parliamentarians, he will invite the Presidents of parliaments from all over the world about these main sessions and invite them.  Invitations will be sent out as far as I know in the next days, and we have two experts, we have those involved to make the main session successful and they will look for candidates and work on an Agenda, so on.

  And in parallel, Germany's parliamentary Committee on the digital Agenda, they will invite a group of parliamentarians from Poland, it is rather our idea to cooperate from Germany to Poland together already at this the IGF.

  The problem, it is that Poland cannot confirm much because they will have parliamentarian elections probably the second part of October.

  In the end, I think we'll have a lot of candidates and hopefully a big group of parliamentarians from the beginning, from day 0, the preevent Number 36, until the main session moving forward.

  Thank you.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you.

  We'll see if there are any follow-up questions or comments from MAG members.

  >> Just so that you can confirm, Poland, if we have decided about Poland for the next IGF meeting?

  >> CHAIR: Yes.  In fact, it was determined at the physical MAG meeting in Germany and announced there.  They're indeed, and they're thankfully at least -- in another region, in the UN context, even though obviously on the same continent we have been at for the last few years.  Yes.


  Having put in a proprietary close to a year ago I think.  It was a well thought out proposal.

  >> I was not aware, and I was pursuing with the Indian government for hosting the next IGF in India.

  >> CHAIR: Maybe we can talk about this offline or talk --

  >> Unfortunately, I'm just -- just to make it clear, unfortunately, it is too late for nexts year  (Rajesh) it was already awarded to Poland and they have started preparation.  The years after that, we can discuss offline.  Yes.

  >> Thank you.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you, I would personally love to go back to India as well, Rajesh, follow-up with Chengetai to we're all clear on the process for future years.

  Thank you.

  I didn't see any follow-up questions.

  >> Hello?  Hello.  This is Mary.  Yes.

  I think -- I had a conversation on the parliamentarian to confirm whether they're going to use the channels, the Diplomatic channels to extend these letters, or they'll also involve us?  I was trying to get to my parliamentarians to send a letter to them that such a letter would be coming and to know who would be available and not be available, the right Committee that would be effective in participating in the global IGF.  I still need to know whether we'll be told or contacted to follow-up.  In some of the countries, if you don't do those internal follow-ups, they may just be laying idle and will not do it.

  Thank you.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you, Mary.

  That's a question for the Secretariat, Baron, a combination.

  >> Yes.  We'll inform the MAG about the process and letters are sent out, if they're ready to be sent out and we will contact you all from the MAG and keep you informed.


  >> CHAIR: Thank you.  And Chengetai, maybe you can just help with that process as well.

  Make sure we're meeting expectations from both sides or all sides.

  >> CHENGETAI: Sure.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you.  Thank you, Mary, for the question.

  We'll move back now to main sessions, why don't we move -- Anja, are you prepared to give an update on the NRI session proposal?

  >> Anja Gengo:  I prepared my comment beforehand.  I can give a brief update if that's fine now.

  So, yeah, especially thank you for giving me the floor.  I'll be very brief, I think on every past MAG meeting we were giving updates, as you know, the core parts of this proposal, they were ready several weeks ago.

  I'll just update on what happened in between starting from the last update that I gave to the MAG on behalf of the NRI network until today.  I hope you can see the proposal, the title, it is the same, the thematic connections to the three teams of the IGF, it is all the same.  The brief description, the objectives to a good extent are the same and the policy question, but I think what's most important for this meeting, it is to update on the format.

  The NRIs, they were very firm on the fact that they would like to change the format compared to the last years, so they're using the so-called mixed format approach.  They'll split the session from one session into two segments,s and in the first segment, the floor will be given to the so-called key participants across the NRIs where we will have a group compose compress of NRIs coming from the landmark developed country, the small island developing states, transitional economies and developed countries, where they'll speak on the topic and the goal is that through these participants we show how this particular topic that the NRIs are speaking on, so the emerging technologies, it is different across all of these countries and across all geographic regions.

  After that, that will last 45 minutes, that session, after that, we're having an hour and 15 minutes to open the floor for a vibrant discussion among the participants and the NRIs.  It is still to be confirmed but the way I see it in the second session, yes, the inputs from the NR Is will be prioritized with -- and then the other participants, they'll also be in a position to ask questions and we'll just be very firm on timing, limiting those interventions to up to 90 seconds.

  As I said, the policy questions that you can see in this shared document is probably the same and until September they'll stay in this form.  Let me just come back shortly on why I said September, just to update on the co-Moderators, so far the network has endorsed that Ms. Marilyn cade be the co-moderator with myself as a if he can oal point and we'll discuss this on the next call to ensure that we have neutrality and the next call we'll discuss that.  For the online moderator, we have Armenia IGF and a MAG member, has been very kind to offer to be the on light moderator which is very important, we do expect a number of the NRIs to be taking an active role through online participation.

  When it comes about the plan for in-room participation, engagement, also for online engaging, engaging online participants, as I said at the begin, we'll prioritize online participants when speaking and I think that will help hopefully to get -- to give them equal treatment as those that are present in person in the room.

  The session is still searching for Rapporteurs, this is a complex session because we expect a lot of different substantive inputs to come in and we're aiming to have between 2 and 4 Rapporteurs and the deadline for the network to suggest these is 15th of August.  As soon as we have these names we'll update the MAG.

  Then to come back to that deadline I mentioned, 1st of September, and then I'll be quickly done:  I announced in previous updates to the MAG, because this session, the consultive process across the NRIs resulted in this very complex topic, and from experience we know that the NRIs will bring different inputs in regards to the substance.  Just to make it easier for the co-Moderators for arranging the whole setup of the session and also to maybe give valuable contributions to the IGF ecosystem, the IGF Secretariat is facilitating the process of gathering inputs from the NRIs on this particular topic and the policy questions in this beforehand.

  So by 1st of September, every single NRI that expressed the desire to take active participation in this session will send up to two paragraphs of their position on this particular topic, standing from their own annual meetings.

  So the Secretariat, they'll gather those inputs, we'll consolidate them in a unique publication, and hopefully it will be a useful input not just for the  NRIs a as a network but for the wider community that's interested in learning more about the differences that exist on this particular topic.

  We do expect that these inputs will come and they'll be a good illustration of how digital divide is present regarding the presence, utilization, the application of the digital technologies, whether it is the existing ones or the emerging ones, new ones in various countries and regions that are enrolled in the NRI processes which is very good percentage of all Member States.

  With that, I think that's what I wanted to -- that's my key update.  I just wanted to also say that these inputs that are going to come, they're actually stories from people, I think that's the most simple explanation on what we're trying to find.  We're not trying to get any narratives or high-level or why this topic is important, we really want to get concrete examples from the NRIs where existence of digital technologies change the lives of people for better or worse, but in any case, something that's very tangible and it will show us what's the impact of the digital technologies on people in various parts of the world.

  Hopefully, long time speaking, if this publication is a success that we're aiming for now, then perhaps it could be -- it would inspire the 2020 MAG may be focused, the intersessional work, on the Best Practice forums or something in the coalitions on this topic, to continue to work on it.  That's where we are, quite ambitious but interesting period.

  Also on the mailing list, I think Chengetai will comment here, I don't think there have is a lot of MAG members that subscribed.  It would be good to have the MAG present also in the meetings and on the mailing list.  I think every single idea to organize this session is really, really valuable and needed.

  That would be all.

  Thank you very much.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you, Anja.

  As you know, I follow the N, are I mailing list quite closely.  I think there is a very, very good discussion on the session, on the planning, and I particularly like the focus on these stories or  high-level case studies I think in terms of making kind of really concrete and as well as providing some concrete outputs from the session as well.  I think it is a really interesting idea.

  I would encourage MAG members to join the planning and of course a number of magazine members are part of the NRI community and participating, there in vocals and -- in both roles but all of the main session  planning, Working Groups, they're open to all MAG members.

  Any further comments from the floor?  Anything that Chengetai would like to add?

  >> CHENGETAI: We would like to encourage the MAG members to join the session planning as they are with the other main sessions.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you, Chengetai.  I'll take a slow count to 6 to see if there are any other requests from the floor on this item.

  Thank you, A in hja for the continuing and most recent updates as well.  Always appreciated and we'll move on to Dynamic Coalitions.

  Jutta, you will provide an update on the Dynamic Coalition?

  >> Jutta:  Thank you for giving me the floor, thank you.

  With regard to the Dynamic Coalitions the coalitions agreed during the last call to once again deal with the Sustainable Development Goals in the session, and that's due to two reasons, one, it is that the Dynamic Coalitions, they would like to demonstrate how they're -- how they're also -- they have the different issues and topics that they're working with, they have something in common, and that's that they're working through the year on the respective issue that they have addressed, but this is somehow also related to the Sustainable Development Goals.  The purpose of the -- the title of the session, I do think Anja has the session, it should be Dynamic Coalitions, joint efforts to achieve the SDGs and within the session the Dynamic Coalitions will firstly demonstrate that they're working throughout the whole year on that issue and that cop tributes to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals to demonstrate that it is a network of different Dynamic Coalitions and that is a network of networks, because all Dynamic Coalitions consist of various organizations and individuals that are working together on a common objective.  It shall be shown that this is all in some sense, it is work that's done to bring something together and to achieve the SDGs.

  We have prepared a template which is on the second page of the template for the main session.

  That shall be filled in by each of the Dynamic Coalitions within the next mother or less two weeks or ten days where the Dynamic Coalitions explain which of the 17 SDGs they have chosen to demonstrate how the work is related to that SDG, and then they'll explain the achievements they have already made with regard to that SDG and then they'll also outline the plans towards 2025, what they will do in regard to that specific SDG, and then they will also try to formulate a policy question that is related to the work of the Dynamic Coalition in regard to that specific Sustainable Development goal.  We have developed the inputs from the possible coalitions and it will be possible to fill in the template for the main session to know on what policy questions the session will concentrate and also what the speakers will have for the main session.  So I have to ask you for a bit of patience until the Dynamic Coalitions have answered to the request to fill in the template and hopefully we'll be able to report a little bit more in detail in the next virtual meeting of the MAG, how this will be brought forward.

  Thank you.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you, Jutta.

  Any questions or comments from MAG members.

  I'll do the usual slow count to 6.

  We look forward to the next update, Jutta, if there is anything we can do from the MAG, the Secretariat, in terms of supporting the planning for the session, please let us know.

  >> Thank you for that offer, Lynn.  Of course, all of you will know that Eleanor is not available for us for the Dynamic Coalition, we're happy to accept any help that's offered.

  Thank you.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you, Jutta.

  Maybe we can talk offline if there is something specific you're looking for.  I'm sure you have the appropriate support.  I know it is a real loss with Eleanor, she did an awful lot to keep them all moving forward.

  Not seeing any other requests from the floor, let me go back to -- I'm working from a note I got from Chengetai.

  There is a main session on Internet of Things or Internet of everything, I'm not sure if that's -- who will give us an updat.

  I thought -- let me check again.

  Okay.  Able to give us an update?  Juliana, I see you on the call as well..

  Juliana has the link to the document in the chat room.  Apparently Michael will present.  Michael, you have the floor.

  >> Michael:  Are you able it o hear me?

  >> CHAIR: You're very faint.

  >> Michael:  Are you able to hear me now?

  >> CHAIR: I can hear you, but you're still quite faint.  I don't know if Luis can help with the volume or if you can get closer to the mic.

  >> Michael:  Is everybody able to hear me now?

  >> CHAIR: I can hear you, but -- can everybody else hear okay?  Maybe watch the captioning.

  Why don't we go ahead, had Michael, if you can speak as loudly as you can or get closer to the mic, I think between that and the captioning, we should be able to move forward.

  >> Michael:  I'll move closer to the mic.

  Good afternoon, everybody.  It is good to give a report on the administration of IoT because of the interconnection.  Basically, this is giving me a chance to briefly explain the work we have done so far.  So far we're working on the title and the participation and note taking for the panelists and the Chair.  We are still hunting for the Chair.  (Speaker too soft to correctly translate).

  Basically, the work we have done so far, we have some possible titles, which the first one, IoT,  interconnection of everything, how to guarantee security, the second one, securing the interconnection of everything and the other, is securing the Internet of Things, the fourth, how do we make Internet of Things safe and secure.  IoT, the fifth, IoT applications and security issues.  So basically we're looking at it from the theme of cybersecurity and IoT.  As soon as we're done with coming up with the title and other details, there will be a representative of the full report, that will be probably next coming in the next virtual meeting.

  Thank you so much.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you, Michael.

  Let me see if there are any comments or questions.

  People are taking a chance to look at the captions and to look through the report.  It was a little bit faint.


  Anything else Juliana or any other Working Group members would like to add?

  This is an important area, we look forward to doing everything we can to support that effort as well.  Again, to the Working Group members, if there is anything specific you're looking for from the MAG, let us know, otherwise we appreciate the work done to date.

  >> Michael:  Thank you very much.  (Too soft to transcribe prebuilt solutions.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you.

  Mary, you have the flo?  Did you want the floor?  Was that --

  >> No.  It is not Mary, please.

  >> CHAIR: Okay.

  Sorry.  Arsene.

  >> Arsene Tungali:  A quick comment from the Working Group on outreach and engagement that's been working on developing a marketing and audit assessment questionnaire that we plan to submit to the IGF Secretariat, this is part of the ongoing work as a Working Group.  The aim of this, the questionnaire, it is to address what's available and what's missing so that we can best provide communications.  So we plan to share this with the Secretariat but we would like to know who is the best person to the Secretariat, to direct this questionnaire to.  So as this has been answered, and it is sent back to us, we have digested it and developed an outreach plan based on the assessments.

  Thank you very much.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you, Arsene.  Chengetai.

  Specifically I think the question was who, you know, is the fist step backward to engage with in the Secretariat.

  >> CHENGETAI: Just send it to me and CCAnja and we'll sort it from there.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you.

    I didn't see anymore questions or requests for the floor for the Internet of Things and cybersecurity, I guess it is Internet of Things, interconnection of everything.  I think we have to continue to close in on the titles to make sure they're reflected properly in the schedule.

  We have two more main sessions to get an update  on.  One is digital governance and digital trade, I think Kenta, you were going to speak to that and then ensuring the inclusion and digital transformation although that may have a different title as well.

  Were you able to give us an update on the digital governance and trade.

  Please, you have the floor.

  >> Kenta:  Hello?  Can you hear me?

  >> CHAIR: Yes, we can hear you.

  >> Kenta:  Thank you.  Thank you very much for giving me the floor.

  You know, in getting approval, I won't -- I won't take the lead on this main session.  It seems like, you know, I got approval to take a lead of this main session.  Actually I drafted the main session proposal so I'm going to share in the mailing list.  It would be wonderful if you take a look at it and provide me any comments.

  Thank you.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you.

  Can you give any additional insight now into kind of the main focus or policy questions?

  >> Kenta Mochizuki:  We have not started the discussion yet.  But our -- you know, our policy question, it doesn't change.  Let me check.

  Hold on, please.

  Yeah.  Actually, you know, this session, it  answers some questions regarding additional trade and some jurisdictional issues.

  We are -- we have now how to ensure the data and the digital collective work and also we have the international organizations, their roles, and also several states and whether that covers the international trade and services, and also, you know, the approved agreements, and so we now have six questions, and we're going to have two main areas and now -- you know, this is completely, you know, my suggestions, but, you know, I plan to invite the G20 Chairs, France and Japan to provide some sort of results of the G7 and the G20 this year and after that, maybe hold a multistakeholder discussion based on the records and then after that, we're going to have an open discussion with the audience.  There will be an intensive array and full discussions and summary of the panelists and also the audience.  After that, you know, finally we'll ask the next year's events and Chairs to make statements, commitments so that they're able to maintain a consistency and continuity of the G20 work toward the future.

  I think -- actually, these are, you know, whole Agendas of this main session, and you know, how will we discuss this and at the same time, I would start to reach out with stakeholder groups to ask some of the candidates and at the same time, you know, I being closely communicating with the Government of Japan, so, you know, hopefully, you know, I'll be able to get us some kind of commitment, the Government of Japan, we participate in the main sessions, but, you know, we have not yet started yet.

  You know, within this year, I'll reach out, to the stakeholder groups and at the same time start discussion on the content of the main session.

  Thank you.

  >> CHAIR: Thank you, Kenta.

  If I could ask you and the other Working Group members to, you know, ad vans the template and get that posted, that would facilitate the MAG's review and support the Working Group as well.

  It is an important topic and a lot of good work was done in the MAG meeting in Berlin.  You have a very solid start.

  Any comments or questions?

  For the MAG members.

  Not seeing any.

  We'll move to the final topic, which is I guess  SDG, ensuring inclusion in digital transformation.

  I also see possible achieving SDGs in the digital age.  I'm not sure where we ended up with respect to the title.

  Nor who is to speak on it.

  Chengetai?  IP.

  >> CHENGETAI: We haven't seen any activity in that group.  I can send emails out, and I didn't get any response.  I'm not sure whether the concerned people are still interested in that or is it just because it is a bad time the past three weeks, two week, yeah.

  >> CHAIR: Was one of the -- it was the second highest subscribed group, if you will, during the MAG meeting in terms of participants.

  Let's --

  >> CHENGETAI: And there is interest from Desa to join the group as well.

  I'm just thinking that it might just be a bad  time.

  >> CHAIR: Let's post another note to the Working Group then and we clearly need -- we won't call out the folks that were engaged.  There were a number of folks that were engaged and chose to participate in that Working Group in the MAG meeting in Berlin and we would hope that that continues to be a session of interest and we'll follow-up and I think quite quickly we'll need to certainly advance all of the planning for the document as well as identify Co-Facilitators for that session.

  Chengetai and I will take that offline and work that with the folks that are identified as part of that Working Group and make sure we get some advances on that ahead of our next meeting.

  I'll give one more opportunity here to see if there is anybody from the MAG that wants to comment on the activities in the Working Group or volunteer to help move it forward.

  Not seeing anyone.

  I also asked the Secretariat in the background if we could consolidate -- I have two different lists in front of me.

  I have the list which was from session topics from the meeting, and then another Document here, but if we could have them reflect the current set of titles, maybe the MAG members that are participating in this  em, and then a third call for the could Facilitators that would help us all get the same -- Mary:  Part of the Working Group, unfortunately, it is a very tough period for me, you know, preparing for a local IGF, regional IGF and all of the rest of them, but I think we would have to start after -- I think Paul is also part of that group, and I think somebody from China.

  I will get back and we'll start working on that and get back, by the next meeting, we'll have that.

  Thank you.

  >> Thank you.  Very much appreciate that.  I know as we said before, this is a busy time and it is a heavy holiday period for some regions as well.  Appreciate everything that the MAG members are doing to continue to move this work forward here.

  We're about 15 minutes left.

  If we look at the Agenda, I could -- I think we'll save the discussion on thematic introductory sessions for the next MAG meeting.  We can do a little bit more prep work I think.  I mean, the notion for the introductory session, it was that we might have sort of visionary speaker or maybe a small panel, it was a good opportunity to expand our outreach to think about some of the multidisciplinary comments we have had.  Obviously, an introduction to the theme.

  Then a good chance to engage with the community on these topics as well.

  We can work to advance those suggestions a little bit more.  I think we're still looking for a home for that activity.  There was a suggestion that perhaps the Working Groups that we're working on, the main sessions that were most related, those would be the ones to move it forward, there was another suggestion which suggested we revert to the Working Groups that were part of forming the main program.  The one who reviewed all of the workshop submissions and there is some familiarity.

  I will take that item forward to the Secretariat to make a specific proposal to the floor.

  Then I'll come to -- for the wrap up session, as well, we'll kind of capture the current State of thinking, the suggestions on that and get that back out so that we can have a more concrete, substantive discussion on the next call.

  I'll go to Paul.  You have the floor.

  >> Paul:  Yes R o.  Wney:  Thank you, Lynn.

  I wanted to add on group six, the SDGs, and I don't think -- I think a couple of people in the group are chatting together offline.  I think something may happen.  I am hoping something will happen.

  I for one was on holiday the last two weeks.  So just landed back in the country today and I know most of the group were tied up on a lot of other things.  I think something would need to happen but I'm hoping it will happen in the course of this week and next week so hopefully next time we have that session we will get the feedback.

  >> CHAIR: Excellent.

  Thank you, Paul.

  I know there's a small core of MAG members that are excited on this topic, I'm fairly confident that to the work will move forward and we really understand that this is a heavy vacation period for some parts of the world.  As long as we keep everything moving forward, we'll be on a good pace.  Thank you.  Thank you for the comments from Mary as well.

  Are there any comments or questions or anything from MAG members or the Secretariat on the current thematic introductory sessions and I think that should actually say and wrap up sessions as well.

  >> (Speaker coming in and out)

  >> CHAIR: I think somebody was asking for the floor.  You were breaking up.

  Maybe it was just an open mic.

  Sylvia, you have the floor.

  >> Sylvia (Speaker) thank you, Lynn.

  Well, I haven't had a chance to comment on the documents that have already passed and we have worked with the guidance with the sessions, but I think it is important to remember that the agreement was that the introductory sessions will not in a similar way with the main sessionings, they'll not compete with  workshops that were approved so ideas on having more discussions on those topics, it may actually take the light out of the workshops that are happening after, so it is also important that they have the introductory sessions, just help the people to understand the definitions, find a good networking opportunities and identify how to navigate the program.  It shouldn't take on the actual subject matter unless it is about introducing the subject matter to the audience.

  In a similar way, the conclusion, I can't remember the name that we're giving, the title of the sessions, the idea was in a similar way to stick to what was discussed in the workshops on that particular topic, so it is important that we don't add more in respect, let's say, to what the dialogue of the community is having in that space instead of starting to design new sessions and new topics as if nothing has been or will be discussed in that issue.

  I don't know.  I think it is important to take -- to have guidelines, make them really strict, and maybe the groups that assess the proposals on each theme, you could have that hour or so and how it looks like, otherwise, it may end up being another session and that's really not the purpose.

  Thank you.  It.

  >> CHAIR: I think we're -- I think there is probably more discussion needed.  Obviously we don't want any session to, you know, to have those sessions compete with any other workshop sessions.

  When we spoke about it in Berlin, there was a notion that it would be something that was challenging, a little visionary, certainly an introduction to the theme overall.

  Something as well that drove some excitement into the themes and the topics.

  Perhaps it was a way to introduce other perspectives or other views of the topic as well.  Including nobody wants to compete or undercut, undermine, confuse the rest of the Agenda or the  topics.

  Maybe we'll pull that session out of the main session guidelines document and use that for a brainstorming session, see what that looks like on the next call.

  I think the wrap up, you know, there is good alignment in that it ought to capture the key messages, any suggestions for future work, next work, et cetera, coming out of the discussions at the IGF and would be a key sort of steppingstone, if you will, for future work or any kind of multiyear planning set of activities.

  Not wanting to kind of shorten the discussion overall, but we're going to bring it forward for a longer discussion on the next call.

  Just one quick -- we'll have to come to updates on the Working Group on the future call, but the discussion on the Ad Hoc Working Group, we're waiting until a series of meetings last week, end of last week in the UN.  There is now kind of good agreement on roles, responsibilities, overall process and structure.  We need to write that up, and get that out.  It is just at a had high-level.  Then still come to the work on the Ad Hoc Working Group which was what else we can do to actually improve the overall reporting process, we have a series of kind of escalating steps, stages, if you will, that begins with these main session reports and obviously the workshop submission themselves which identified main objectives like policy questions, desired outputs, et cetera, and the reporting process, so we followed the last few years, it was kind of advancing that in stages, the closer we got to the IGF itself, and then there were two reporting steps, one kind of immediately following the session so we could support key messages and then a follow-up a week or so later.

  We just want to revisit that process, there is a group that's been established, a number of people that volunteered and I'll send out both an introductory memo and a poll to set up the calls, probably the calls over the next four, six weeks, something like that.

  Any other questions or comments on any of the last items we have just kind of ran through quite quickly?

  We'll make sure there is more time on the next Agenda to work through those more completely.

  Any other AIB anyone would like to talk about before we close.

  Chengetai, do he have with the next call set up as well?  I think we moved this back a week.

  Let's agree now when the next call is going to be.

  It is usually in two weeks.

  As we have said, that would make it 31 #st of  July, I don't know if that's fine with the people in the group.  As you said, you know, it is a holiday period and there is a lot of events happening.  If it is okay for the 31st of July, we'll set it for the  31st, if not --

  >> CHAIR: Any comments?

  We'll say the 31st is fine.

  Do you think if they can keep -- there is a number of people coming in saying that's fine.

  >> CHENGETAI: I yes.

  >> CHAIR: If we can keep up the pace, people can continue to populate the templates and that sort of thing, that will help us to at least keep the work moving forward.

  Similar to the comment, no, there's not been a written report.  There was an extensive meeting last week, last Thursday in New York with the Secretariat, with Desa, the Host Country, myself on sort of the reporting expect tastes and resources and that sort of thing.  We need to get the update out and we'll use that to kick off the Ad Hoc Working Group on reporting.  M

  >> Mary:  I think it is a very difficult period for the next call.  As you said, I think we can just be working especially the working groups and the rest of the teams on what we -- if it is not feasible, then we would do work on the mailing lists if people would be online.  I want to support the proposal.  That's what I want to say.

  On AIB, we didn't say anything about the village, is it not yet time to talk about the village and how it will work and how it will be managed and whether we'll be inviting high-level officials, how -- high-level participants to tour the village as we did sometime  ago.  Just a thought.

  >> CHAIR: A good question.  I saw that comment posted on the NRI discussion as well.  Chengetai?

  >> CHENGETAI: I did do a very brief update on the village that the materials are out.

  On your question specifically about inviting  high-level participants, to tour the village, from my understanding, from the German government, there is going to be quite a number of high-level participants coming, especially for the day 0 and day 1.

  I think we could try to carve out some time for them to do a tour of the IGF village and, you know, they may learn more about our activities and also other -- that's a good idea.  We could look at the schedule and see whether or not we can put in some time to have a walk through tour by the day 0 high-level participants.

  >> CHAIR: Will the village be set up with day 0?  Is that what participants are --

  >> CHENGETAI: Correct me if I'm wrong, Anja, they can start upsetting it up from basically Friday.  Setting up the village.  It really depends on when they come in, and we can also discuss and see what the timeline is for them to set it up.  I think it will be available for them to -- the space will be available for them to set it up from Friday basisically.

  >> CHAIR: The two things go hand-in-hand.  The high-level tour, we want to make sure that people are prepared and vice versa.

  Maybe we can just try to advance that in to the next few weeks.  It may mean that people also may need to adjust travel plans too.

  >> CHENGETAI: Also, it will be -- it will be up to the village participants.  We can't move the times at all.  Friday is basically the -- if they come in on Saturday, it doesn't take that long to set up the village.  If they come in on Saturday and maybe give them Sunday morning we'll see if it works.  We're not promising anything.  It depends on the schedule of the high-level participants.  If it doesn't work, it doesn't work.

  We can look into it.

  >> Mary:  Thank you, Chengetai.

  I think that it is best if we're to do it, do it effectively, it would be the day of the opening ceremony.  Right after the is opening ceremony if they come around or before the opening ceremony.

  I'm not sure that the village would have been very set on the days 0 because people will be coming in.  I don't know with travel plans if it is feasible to do that or day one.  Thank you.

  >> CHAIR: Very good comments, Mary.  I think we have to make sure that they're going hand-in-hand with respect to that.

  Thank you.

  Thank you, everybody, for joining.

  Those that joined from holidays, at times outside of the work hours, really appreciate the effort and we will talk to you again in two weeks.  Thank you.


  Thank you, Chengetai.  Anja, Luis.

  >> CHENGETAI: Thank you, Lynn.  U. thank you, everybody.  Yes.