The following are the outputs of the real-time captioning taken during an IGF virtual call. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: I think we are ready to start. Just a reminder, the meeting is being recorded. It is also being transcribed and a summary report will come up a couple of days after the meeting and be published on the IGF website. We will try and use the speaking queue. So the link is being posted into the chat right now for the speaking queue.
And with that I will hand it over to the Chair to start the meeting.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you very much, Chengetai. I switched on my video. I'll just do it for a little while.
And having attended a dip low session on online meetings today, where I learned that it is important to use video whenever possible.
And welcome, everyone. Welcome to the Secretariat, to all the MAG members, and observers and also to our captioners, wherever they are working from tonight.
We have quite an agenda so I'll try to be brief. It has been another busy two weeks and I have seen how you all worked. I will be checking in with you individually in the next two weeks, particularly with the MAG members that are new, but with everyone to get a sense that people are fine with participating, whether there are issues, questions or concerns so that we have a good sense and I have a good sense of what your experiences have been on the MAG. I shared as promised on the last call the proposal for online sessions. Thanks to those who have given feedback. We can continue with the discussion on that in the lead-up to the June meeting.
And I think that is all from me. There are other issues I would like to raise but I'll do that in the course of the meeting. And as you get the updates from the Secretariat.
So welcome, everyone. I'll make sure that we finish on time as I try to usually and wishing us all a good meeting.
>> Sorry, but the captioners have no audio for transcripts. So if somebody can do something about that?
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks for that. Are they not getting the audio? Is that the issue?
>> LUIS BOBO: Well, it seems like that, I opened the link and it says that -- oh, okay, now they started, obviously.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Oh, good, good, okay.
Thanks for that.
And I think we are ready to proceed.
So Chengetai, can I hand back to you for the update from the Secretariat? Just, sorry, I haven't checked. Does anybody have any questions about the agenda? I assume there is no objections to the agenda?
>> LUCIEN CASTEX: It is quite fine.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Let's move to item 2, checking in on action items from the previous call.
So just to tell you why we've introduced this. Some MAG members have asked me whether we check up on action items.
And the Secretariat does. They do check up on action items, but we thought we would include that as a short matter in the session in every meeting just so we have a sense that we are on track that we have action items for me, for myself or the Secretariat.
Chengetai, can I hand you to Action Item 2?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much. I'm taking the action items that were distributed. Sorry, I have to just cough.
I think these were distributed last week as well.
So I am just taking it from the top. So the first action item that I have in front of me is MAG breakout groups.
So how to set up breakout groups for the second open consultations and MAG meeting and so the breakout groups were to define their own work methodology before the meeting.
So that is one action item. But that is only due by the fifth of June. You still have time.
You all know your groups. The purpose of this is that you are supposed to get into your groups and discuss how you are going to deal with the breakout groups.
If you recall for the workshop breakout groups and the main session breakout groups we are going to have overnight breakout groups and it is up to you to define how you are going to work in those groups. You have until the 1st of June.
Workshop evaluations that is to create a checklist on the workshop evaluations. That was with the MAG Chair and IGF Secretariat and Anriette did send that to the list.
So that is done.
Draft Agenda for the Second Open Consultations and MAG Meeting. Yes, we do have the Draft Agenda out. And we are in the process of informing the community.
One very important thing, I did have a question from a MAG member whether or not we are going to have a face-to-face meeting. Since the news is that in Geneva at least they are going to start opening it up more by the 8th of June but no, we are not going to have a face-to-face meeting. It is still going to be online.
So it is definitely online. There will be no changes to that from now.
And yes, I think that is all the action items that I have in front of me.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks a lot for that, Chengetai. In the future we will do this. It will be good to have it in writing on the screen in front of us, but we will do that from the next call.
Any questions from the action items?
I see, over to you, Veni.
>> VENI MARKOVSKI: Thanks. This is just a question to Chengetai about the --
(Audio cutting out.)
>> VENI MARKOVSKI: I will send out the Power Point so that everybody can see it. It's got what we propose. And I think I presented it last week. I didn't get any feedback from anybody saying that things should be changed. So I presume that this is what we are going to stick with. I will send to the MAG list to make sure that everybody has it.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you. Veni, I think you might have missed the last call.
It will be made up as you can see on the screen a combination of Plenary Sessions that are relatively short and then breakout groups we are trying to design the agenda in such a way that people can join breakout groups that work well for them in terms of the time zone. I think the idea is as Chengetai said we will distribute this online. We also need you to start looking at how to plan and facilitate and coordinate. That is later on the agenda as well.
Ben, you have the floor.
>> BEN WALLIS: Thank you. Hello, everybody. And just if we are going to talk, we will talk about the breakout sessions later in the call. Maybe I should wait until we get to that. I think Jennifer also asked a question about how the breakout sessions will be managed and you have some ideas but I am happy to come back to that under 4.2, I think. Just to thank you for this item at the start of the meeting where we go to the item from the last meeting. That will be useful.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, Ben. And thanks for being willing to wait.
Anyone else who would like to speak on this Agenda Item? I see no one in the speaking queue.
And I don't see, are there any hands up?
>> LUIS BOBO: I think Mary just spoke.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Go ahead, Mary.
>> MARY UDUMA: Okay. Thank you. Can you hear me?
>> Yes, we can.
>> MARY UDUMA: Okay, thank you. Unfortunately I didn't look through these documents, but I am concerned about the number of hours that we are spending.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Mary, we are coming back to that in the meeting a little bit later on. Item 4.2. So if you don't mind, could you please just wait a little bit until then?
So we will give you the floor. You can have the floor, be the first person in the queue when we come back to the June meeting, which is Item 4.2.
So on this I would like to hand over to our friend from Poland, I am not sure if it is Michael that is online. But if you can please take us on to Item Number 3, updates from the Host Country.
>> ANNA: Thank you very much, Anriette. This is my first time here today. Let me just briefly introduce myself. I'm Anna. I am working with the Minister of Developers which is responsible for organising the 15th IGF in Poland.
I would like to share with you a little bit about what happened yesterday. We had very good webinar with the young people. Thank you very much, Anja and Chengetai, for facilitating the process and helping us organise everything.
Since we have decided in Poland that we will have like a special input and owe though will be a very important part of the IGF. We have organised together with IGF Secretariat this first webinar.
Just maybe very briefly what we have found out, we have over 160 participants from different countries. They were very interested in the process. We had a good brainstorming session, but idea sharing. There were some interesting points raised, for example communication issues that more central communication is needed and there were questions how to communicate to the general public, especially how to reach out to universities and educational institutions. We had a very good feedback on what happened in Berlin for young people. They indeed liked this approach. They underlined that since they are mostly working on the voluntary basis, they need to be encouraged step-by-step and they have to be given the, something very concrete. They have to be part of the process, not given the process.
And there was also some concrete ideas what can be done. They were looking for some training sessions for young initiative leaders, some facilitating for the newcomers. Many times the central communication issue was raised up.
So it is just like in a nutshell. I found personally this webinar very interesting. And inspiring.
Just to let you know also that for the young, for those who have taken in Poland the multi-stakeholder approach, we have involved our research institute. They are actually proceeding on the. This will be in the nutshell about the webinar.
Maybe Chengetai would like to or Anja would like to add something more on that. After that preparation process we are on track. All the logistics are secured. Of course, we are continuing preparations. Nevertheless we are monitoring the situation with COVID.
That will be all at that point, but I am open for my questions. If there are any. Thank you.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you very much, Anna. I participated in the call. You are absolutely right, it was a really good call. Congratulations to you and your team and also to Anja for her work on this.
Anja, did you want to add anything before I open the floor to questions?
>> ANJA GENGO: Thank you very much, Anriette, and thank you, Anna, for such a comprehensive overview of what happened yesterday. I have nothing to add except given the interest from the youth yesterday, I think we have a lot of work for us in the coming months. There is a dedicated mailing list that we will communicate to the MAG. So the interested MAG members can subscribe there.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you, Anja. I want to open the floor to questions, but there seems to be a problem with the captioning, is that correct? I'm looking at the chat and it looks like some people are struggling. I also can't see the captioning. Secretariat, can you help us?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Hi, Anriette, sorry to jump in.
Yes, the captioning link is pasted as I said before. It is in the chat.
For some reason they are having issues today injecting it into Zoom, but we are trying to fix it as soon as possible. So you should have the transcription also in Zoom as well and the meeting is being recorded in any case for the record later.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you, Luis. I apologize to those who are struggling without having the captioning to follow. Luis is working on getting it right and we are recording the meeting.
And anyone with any questions for Anna? I see no hands up.
The speaking queue, no. Okay. Anna, I think that's understandable. You know, there's a lot of work to get through the agenda.
I think it will be nice if you and/or Anja can share something in writing, just to send a little update to the MAG about the progress that you are making with your participation. Thank you very much for your report.
>> ANNA: Thank you.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Next we have updates from the Secretariat. And so Chengetai, can I give the floor to you to lead us through Item Number 4?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Anriette. So for the updates from the Secretariat, we have published the list of open forums, Day 0 events, Dynamic Coalitions and also the village booths.
These are the people who have applied. It is not the finalists. It is those that we are considering.
If you were to, did not fill in the form correctly, et cetera, but there are on the IGF website, and I think a link can be published in the chat for people to look at.
The next thing as well, we do have the translations of the chair summary and these are on the website.
We must also point out that these are unofficial translations. We have had most of them checked, but I think one or two, like the Chinese version is still being checked.
So they are there. I think that is very good news.
There is also a newsletter that is being produced. And it should be out definitely before the end of this week. It is just going to be basically, we do plan to do a monthly newsletter. This newsletter is basically focusing on this month and looking ahead into next month an highlighting what we are doing, session activities and also the plans that we are having.
That will be out by the end of this week.
One thing I would like to point out, for our virtual hubs, we still don't have that high a number of virtual hubs. I would still urge you please to encourage your communities to apply and organise themselves into virtual hubs.
Hopefully by the end of, by November we can all congregate into hubs. At least I think we will be free to move within our countries at the very least.
So I think these virtual hubs will be and are very important. It is also good to get input into the workshops. Not just by individuals, but also by groups of people.
I did mention the second round of consultations. It is definitely on. We are not changing that anymore. There was a question of whether or not we would be able to change it, but the change for working days is just past. There is no way we can change it now. It is going to be a virtual meeting. Then I will leave the discussion about the group logistics to the chair.
I think those are all the updates from the Secretariat. Let me just do the usual round from the rest of the team, if they have something to say.
If you do, Anja or Luis? Do you have anything?
>> LUIS BOBO: No, I have nothing.
>> ANJA GENGO: No, nothing.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: And Limas?
>> Nothing from my side. Thank you.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you, I apologize.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: I am going to take the liberty to tell the MAG, the Secretariat team has been working really hard in the past two weeks on the newsletter because the newsletter has to link to news items on the website. And the website structure at the moment didn't necessarily have all of those news items. They have had to do some rechecking with the existing site, adding news items, making sure everything is up to date. So that the newsletter can seamlessly link to information on the site. The newsletter provides a window to information on the site.
And because this is the first newsletter it is also not that easy. We are still establishing the routines.
So they really all have been working very hard with this, with Samantha Dickinson, the developer of the newsletter. I want to thank them and praise them for their work on that.
And so this item, 4.2, the Second Open Consultations and MAG Meeting. Group logistics. We really want to get the discussion going.
So Chengetai, can you or Luis, if you can put the agenda back on screen for us?
And then I want to give the floor to Mary. Because Mary, you started earlier. If you are still online with us, expressing some concern about the timing. But just to introduce our discussion, we have developed a very provisional agenda. It is made up of Plenary Sessions. Some of the Plenary Sessions will make use of prerecorded inputs. But then that is really the Open Consultation day on 15 June.
And then Day 1 when we start the MAG work, the idea is -- I'm going to run through this for everyone, that we have a Plenary of around two hours. And then we break up into breakout groups. We haven't specified here, how long, in which time slots those breakout groups will work. That's what we need to discuss. We have a Plenary Session of three and a half hours. And then again with our breakout groups and there are three hours of Plenary Session followed -- in fact, we don't have break out groups on Day 3. And Day 4 we have our final Plenary which is intended to be only two and a half hours.
What we need to do now is to get your input on how we can design the breakout groups.
I also think it is important to consider -- once we break into the break out groups we shouldn't wait for them to start after the Plenary. We should do some preparatory work.
If people have questions or ideas about how we can most effectively design this meeting, I know some of you participated in DIPLO's conference today on the future of meetings which I found very useful. Lots of useful to follow the example and look at what they've done and how creatively they used Zoom. For example, they have interactive coffee breaks using Zoom. And they are using the Zoom facility to break into different rooms.
And we will also send something to you in writing that can help us start this process of preparation.
But now I just want to open the floor. I know we have Mary in the queue and Ben is also in the queue. So we are opening the floor for general questions and ideas. And questions also about what is involved in further preparation for the meeting. Mary?
>> MARY UDUMA: Okay. Thank you. Can you hear me?
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Yes, we can hear you.
>> MARY UDUMA: Thank you for giving me the floor. First I want to thank the Secretariat for the draft. I have to confirm first is the number of hours on day 1. The second is if we start the second meeting by 10, is this 10 UTC or 10 Geneva time?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: At the moment, those times are in Geneva times.
>> MARY UDUMA: Thank you very much.
Starting by 10:00 o'clock, I don't know whether it will suit most -- I mean some of us. For me, it is no problem. Some of us from Africa might not be a problem, but the Latin America and the Asia-Pacific, I don't know whether you took that into consideration because I think the best time to do the Plenary would have been when the whole world is awake from coast to coast, that they are awake. Then we will start off.
I don't know whether that will be taken into consideration. I am suggesting that we do take that into consideration so that we will not miss anyone during that period. It might be too early for some of the MAG members and other people who may want to join us online. That is the first one.
I was worried about the breakout but after attending the meeting earlier today I saw that it can easily be done. And it will be designed to go to different rooms to have a meeting and to continue and come back to Plenary and share our and continue our meeting in the main hall.
So as Anriette said, it is just putting in more plans into it, thinking through it, and making it happen. So I know there is the Zoom facility there as well when we consider.
So let me stop there so others will have the floor to talk. Thank you.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Anriette, can I answer that or shall I wait?
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Yes, I actually notice that this agenda has different times. Didn't we have an earlier agenda where we had the Plenary Sessions alternating also between the slots we used for MAG meetings? But please go ahead, Chengetai.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: For the opening day, yes, the Plenary Session is in the morning, but to help with those in different time zones, what we said is that the briefings or presentations or interventions, the set ones like from the host country chair, the briefing from the host countries, the Secretariat's briefing, et cetera, those kind of set briefings will be prerecorded and then put on to our YouTube channel. So that people in different time zones can actually listen to them and send in written questions.
So when we do have the actual event, the actual live event, those written-in questions will also be answered by those presenters and if it is at an odd time, people can also go back to the YouTube channel and listen to their responses. Since it is a 24 hour clock we can't really find the perfect time. We will be inconveniencing somebody somehow, whether it be time-wise or whether it be that is the time when they have to take their kids to school or something or the other.
So that is the way we were planning to try and accommodate people from different time zones having these prerecorded sessions and also having the write-in questions and the answers and people can always go back to the recording that is archived on YouTube.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, Chengetai. I will reserve my remarks for later.
And Ben, you're next.
>> Ben WALLIS: Thanks very much. I wanted to make a general comment or question about the breakout groups at the end of day 1 and day 2 and then a question on how the break out groups and workshops might relate to the work by the Working Groups for the different themes.
So the more general comment about these breakout sessions, I think the only practical way of doing it is doing it by region, by time zone. So in that sense I think you could predetermine four or five slots: One for the Americas, one for -- at least a couple for the Asia-Pacific Region.
So that MAG groups could meet at times that are convenient for them. So I think that seems like a practical way of doing it.
You could minimize the amount of sessions by just kind of preselecting a few time zones and people could pick. Presumably people are going to cluster in the regions that they are sitting in.
So specifically about the workshops, my hope is, and we are discussing this in the Working Group on workshop evaluation, that recommendations for each of the tracks can be quite well thought through, specific recommendations for which workshops to approve, which mergers to consider, are already considered to the MAG before the 15th of June.
As a result of the work that is done, I think it is the 11th of June, within the thematic Working Groups that relate to each track.
The more we can do that in advance, the less we need to do in breakout groups in different time zones. Given that those breakout groups are not going to be the same as the thematic Working Groups because those Working Groups include people from 12 different time zones.
So we are putting this effort in to try to find a process to help all of the thematic Working Groups come up with quite detailed recommendations to minimize the amount of further discussion that will be necessary during the meeting on the 15th and 16th, 17th of June.
So indeed, even in Germany last year we came to the MAG meeting and all of the thematic Working Groups were already presented their detailed working recommendations. It was about the MAG discussing recommendations and whether or not anything needed to be tweaked or whether they or to what extent they were happy with the detailed work already done by the thematic Working Groups because they looked at it in a lot of detail. I'm hoping we can do something similar this year and the workshop evaluation Working Group can come up with a process that each of the Working Groups can use to enable them to come up with the detailed recommendations in advance.
Let me stop there. Thank you.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you, Ben. I think preparation will definitely be key. And preparing doing as much work before hand, but also making sure that we have Facilitators and rapporteurs for all the breakout groups pre-identified. That will also make a huge difference.
>> SYLVIA CADENA: Thank you, Anriette. Can you hear me?
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Yes, we can hear you clearly.
>> SYLVIA CADENA: Good morning, everyone. I wanted to pick up on the last sentence, actually. I am a little bit concerned about the Working Groups working overnight, right? And the load on the Facilitators for those thematic groups.
So to keep track of the discussions that happened when we are not part of that time zone or whatever it is that is happening and who is going to take the notes or the summary for the discussions during those times.
So I don't know, Jen made a question earlier about trying to figure out if those discussions would be by tile zone or by thematic group. Out of the group that is in the trust one group or if it will be trust one and trust two group, those groups have people spread around different type zones.
So having conversations on the thematic areas probably will happen over a long period of hours, right, that covers different type zones.
I wonder if we are going to have Secretariat support for checking on summaries or what is the idea for note taking. And if that is the case, we need -- if we are not going to have Secretariat support for the duration of those conversations, then it is going to be very tricky to figure out what the shift for a MAG member is to get on, make sure they are taking notes and following what was agreed as a way to discuss because the discussion can be arranged if the same Facilitator is not following the agenda, right? So it will be very difficult to focus and concentrate, especially knowing that a bunch of people are probably, I don't know, will be able to participate in one block of the condition and they want to contribute everything they have with all their comments and not on other points of the agenda that may be spread around different breakout discussions.
So I don't know, I'm trying to figure out how mechanically how this will work. I really hope that the Secretariat can help us there. That is an comment, Chengetai, it is our responsibility to figure it out.
But we definitely need the Working Group on workshop evaluation to figure out steps and things like that. And the logistics, we are not getting that far, not yet. It will be good to have input from the Secretariat and also knowing what resources we can leverage on. Thank you.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: I will respond, Sylvia, but I will first give the floor to Roberto. Roberto, you have the floor.
>> ROBERTO ZAMBRANA: Thank you, Madam Chair. Actually I lowered my hand, but I will go ahead.
What I wanted to say, I'm also concerned about dividing the groups in different slots. I know it is going to be a sacrifice for some of us, maybe not for all but for some, in some moments. But I think it is important to have the opportunity to listen between each other when we have this substantial discussions.
That is why I would prefer if we can just have the more convenient times for all, or at least for most, but have just one slot.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks very much for that input.
I think, I know this feels very confusing, but I am convinced that we will get this right. I think the first success criteria is that we do a lot of preparation. So the decisions about Working Group mergers, for example, would need to be made before the June meeting so that we use the June meeting just to review and validate and finalize the decisions on mergers. I think Ben is actually putting some good opinions in the chat as well.
I think the other success criteria will be for us to identify before hand what time slots the breakout groups will take place in and what the topic and the task of the breakout groups will be and also pre-identify Facilitator for each breakout group and a rapporteur.
If we do that, those rapporteurs can leave the notes in a common -- we will need a meeting online workspace where we can share reports from the breakout groups so before we go to the next Plenary, everyone has had the chance to read the reports of the breakout groups. We need to do more preparation an we need to send you a document that outlines it in more detail.
But I also think we are going to have to do -- we have to prepare. We can't just run what would be a face-to-face meeting virtually. We have to prepare for a virtual meeting. That is going to require probably more preparatory work than you did for the June meeting last year.
I am just checking in the chat if there are any other suggestions there that I should read out.
I see Dalsie saying that the Working Group should be identified earlier. Absolutely. I think that is what Chengetai was wanting us to start tonight, is to begin to think about what would be the different Working Groups and what would be the tasks and how we can prepare for that but I think it is hard to do that with just this particular document or screen. I think we should send you something else.
Chengetai, my proposal would be that the Plenaries are in the same time zones that we use for MAG calls. If we alternate them, I think someone made that suggestion in the chat earlier. This is important. This is our only MAG meeting this year remaining, online, full-on MAG meeting as opposed to calls.
I think trying to have our Plenary Sessions in time zones where many of us as possible can be together is important.
So I am not sure that that -- I would suggest we rethink the current time slots, the 10:30 time slots and use some of the same time slots as for our MAG calls.
The next step I propose would be that I work with the Secretariat and we give you a document that makes it easier for you to comment on and we then start getting MAG members to work on the preparation for us. But I think we need to give you something that will frame and guide that discussion.
Are there any other questions on this?
I think it is important that we keep the meeting -- I know it looks very intimidations when you see total duration 22 hours. I think the idea is that it is not that people are going to be working around the clock. In fact, quite the contrary. We want to keep the Plenary sessions short so that we can be active. And we want to keep the breakout sessions short so that they can be productive.
One question now that it will be good to get a sense from people on is our MAG calls are two hours. And if that is two hours generally a cut did off point for us to continue without a break session, I would say yes. Or would you like breaks? Is two hours too long without a break?
Just looking at the chat for responses.
Yes, Veni, two hours is a lot. When we start planning this out in detail both for the Plenary Sessions and the breakout groups, let's put breaks in so people can have a bathroom break, grab something to drink, to stretch their legs so that we keep it as human as possible.
So I think unless there are more questions on this, the more we delve into this, the more we realise it is not a trivial exercise. I also am convinced that we will make a success of it.
So I think we can move on to the next item on the agenda. Which is Item Number 5. But I do want you all to think about this online meeting process. When we send this document out, let's start discussing it in more depth.
So Item Number 5 is workshop evaluation process. And thanks very much to everyone who started working on that.
Chengetai, can you give us an update on how that is going? On how many MAG members have been able to start working on that?
Then I would like to -- I know there was a question about the sequence of the evaluation form and the fact that it doesn't match the format of the workshop proposals. Luis can give us the options on that.
Then I'm going to open the floor to any other questions that people might have and we will hear from the workshop process Working Group.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes. Thank you very much, Anriette. We looked into the workshop evaluations and there is, it is a bit difficult to tell who has started and who has not started. Because for instance, some people, the way they mark, they have an Excel sheet and they input it so that there is not any updates into the system. There are 30 people who have not inputted anything into the evaluation system. That doesn't mean that they are not working on evaluating, using Excel sheets.
But we do know that there are 14 people who have not yet logged on at all to their evaluation system. So we assume that those are the 14 people who have not started at all, or even looked at the evaluation system.
So what we will be doing is that we will just be giving, asking them, we will approach them individually and ask them if they are having any issues, et cetera, because I think they should have at least logged on and looked at their evaluation system if they were doing anything.
I hope that helps.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, Chengetai. If anyone has any problems or difficulties, please don't hesitate to ask for help. But do start working. The longer you wait, the more difficult it becomes to get it all done.
And Carlos Afonso, can you explain what your question was that you put in the chat, about the difficulty of the evaluation form not matching the workshop proposal and Luis can give you options on that.
>> CARLOS ALBERTO AFONSO: Good afternoon, everyone. I started to evaluate the proposals and the difficulty was that the sequence of items in the form, in the proposal forms is different from the sequence of items in the evaluation form.
So you have to keep going because some proposals are a bit complex. You have to reread, go bag and forth, navigate through the proposal several times in order to respond in the sequence of the evaluation form.
I wonder why the sequence in the evaluation form is not the same as in the proposal form. This would save a bit of time for us to evaluate.
Do you understand the point?
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Yes, I follow you. I understand.
>> CARLOS ALBERTO AFONSO: It is too late to correct now, but --
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: It is not impossible. I think the reason it happened is because when we redeveloped the proposal form, we shifted the sequence around. We changed the sequence a bit.
>> CARLOS ALBERTO AFONSO: That's right.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Then the evaluation form, that didn't really happen.
It is possible, Luis, can you explain what the pros and cons are of moving the sequence of the evaluation form?
>> LUIS BOBO: Thank you.
>> CARLOS ALBERTO AFONSO: Just to complete. Luis, sorry, sorry. It is not a big deal, we can handle, okay? If it is easy to do, okay. If it is not, we will go ahead with that anyway, no problem, okay?
>> LUIS BOBO: Thank you, Anriette and Carlos, no, it is very fast. Anriette, the reason there were discussions about switching the order of the content, the content in the proposals around as much as possible to match to the new form and the point is that the evaluation keeps the discussion, the order of last year. It has not been decided by the group to change anything with that.
It can be changed. So the only thing I see with that, for people who have started, if they have been used to some order and they are, for example, doing it more faster or something and putting the evaluation in the criteria, maybe they could make a mistake just putting myself in your scheme, that could happen. If you just pay attention, this is the MAG list and please be careful that the order of the selection in the evaluation form has been just updated, just for you to decide.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: So my proposal would be that unless there are any objections to us shifting the order, that we go ahead and we ask Luis to shift the order.
So the content will not change. It will just be the sequence of the different aspects of the evaluation form that will change.
And Luis, will this have any implications for the import of Excel sheets?
>> LUIS BOBO: No, no, no, thank you. The point is that we usually don't, this is for personal use. You can use them if they help you, but you have to put the information there in the system.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Okay, okay.
So I think that if there is no objection, we will give you overnight, our night to object and then we'll go ahead and change it. I think it will make it easier for people.
Karim, I see you have a question about the Excel template. And Secretariat, if you can send out a reminder for those people that want to work offline. We have PDFs and then in the Excel sheet I think was developed by Ben; is that correct? And he shared it.
So Ben, if you can share that again in the MAG list for those who want to use it?
>> BEN WALLIS: Yes, happy to do that.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Are there any questions based on the work you've done so far on the evaluation process?
(There is no response.)
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: I don't see any hands in the queue. I will now hand over to Roberto and Afi and others to update you on the workshop Working Group has been doing. They have done quite a lot of work and worked on the document to assist with mergers and other aspects of workshop evaluation.
Roberto, can I hand over to you for your report on the work?
>> ROBERTO ZAMBRANA: Thank you very much, Anriette. Yes, we were sharing our last Working Group, in our last meeting we were working on the document that will help us during this process. That, of course, the individual evaluation process that we have to wait until 29th of May. But after that. In the stage what we already consider it as stage 3 and the different things that could be important for us to prepare previous to our meeting in June 16.
So knowing that after this individual evaluation we need to wait for the Secretariat to work with the general analytics and provide us with the statistics and the most important input which will be the ranking list for each group, and the overall ranking list with this information.
Then we need to start very rapidly to come up with the final selection that we as groups are going to recommend.
So there are different criteria that we are actually discussing about and we are analyzing to have a couple of meetings really soon. One should be by the end of Thursday or Friday, by the end of this week; another one during the next week. And hopefully in those two calls that we are going to organise, then we will finish the work about this document.
This is a general guidance for workshop evaluation process. Again it is mainly focused in stage 3. And well, we are still receiving a lot of inputs from the Working Group. I think it is going to be a very good document and it is going to support a lot the work of the evaluation Working Groups.
Perhaps some one of the other members of our Working Group may also have something? For me that will be a summary, Anriette. Thank you very much.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you, Roberto. Any additions from other members of the group?
(There is no response.)
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Any questions for the group?
>> BEN WALLIS: Sorry, struggling to find the right -- just an addition to, as a member of that Working Group. Last year we had a week, as we have this year, for the thematic Working Groups to look at their group rankings and then make some recommendations. We spent the first day or two of that very short time deciding on a process for how we were going to work and come up with decisions.
And so each group did that. Used that time and came up with slightly different approaches.
So the idea was to try to build on the work done last year in the different Working Groups and to come up with the more uniform process. So there is more consistency in approach and also people can hit the ground running. Hopefully it will be helpful for this year and for other years as well. I think that's where a lot of value will lie. Thanks.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks a lot for that, Ben.
And I'm just wondering, just thinking aloud here, that is for MAG users, email and mailing lists and online meetings as ago tool. I wonder if we can look at another platform that will help us prepare for this virtual meeting.
Chengetai, I'm flagging that, we should think about that, whether we use Google Docs or Teams or online documents, but I do think we are going to need an online platform for collaborative writing for the meeting to help us to prepare and also run the meeting.
Let's consider how we can best do that.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, I have actually been thinking about things like that. I mean, we could implement a wiki or something like that. Maybe the best thing to do is to do something that everybody is familiar with. And I think everybody is familiar with like the Google set of tools. Unless Ben wants to -- sorry, I don't want to put him on the spot, but yes, something like that, yes.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Well, let's think about that. I think we definitely will need something of that nature.
Ben, are you done? I see you are still in the queue.
>> BEN WALLIS: Yes, I'm done. I thought it took my hand down. I'll remove that.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Okay. So we are on our first hour. I'm tempted to give people a short break. Seeing as we talked about that. If there are -- is there a need for a break or shall we continue? I'm looking at the chat session.
No, no, no. Continue. I think that's right. People want to finish.
And sleep or have more coffee depending on what time zone they are in.
Thanks, Chair. And thanks to the Working Group for your hard work. You work a lot and I appreciate that.
Next we have updates from MAG members on MAG Working Groups. So can I ask, I know TT is ready and I will put her on the spot and ask her to start with the report of the Working Group on strategy and IGF strengthening.
>> CONCETTINA CASSA: Thanks. Can you hear me? Anriette? Yes?
The Working Group on IGF strengthening and strategy. We are going to finalize this by next week. The main purpose of the Working Group is to make proposal on how to strengthen the role of IGF and try to define a roadmap to follow up on the many thoughts of the Working Group.
The activity we start with the analysis of the IGF mandate as defined in the Tunis Agenda, suggesting improvement and integration.
And the main issues to debate the process include several points as the mechanism to put in place in order to strengthen cooperation a among IGF stakeholders and international IGF community.
We need to discuss what are the activities, services that the IGF provides to attract more international Internet Governance community to play a central role in the development of public policies.
Another point that the Working Group will try to debate is what should be put in place to facilitate and communicate IGF outputs that address public issues worldwide. In this case we will discuss if recommendations are good options or the other possible choice and options.
Another item that is included in the Working Group is about parameters. We will debate if parameters should be added to the MAG and how we can improve communication among the IGF an governments in order to have a follow-up of IGF efforts at the legislative level.
One more question that will be debated is referred to IGF, financially and institutionally sustainable. And one more point of discussion will be how can we get the State of art of policy implementation worldwide.
How can we measure them? We think that maybe there could be an option that could support this suggestion.
The last item but not least is about the action that IGF could put in place to implement IGF craft model suggested in the recommendation in the document on digital cooperation.
What action can be put in place? Also if there is something that may be in the IGF model is missed.
The Working Group on strengthening and strategy will consider the previous Working Group document that has been developed so far. So just to mention some one of them, the CSDD Working Group on the report of the IGF the programme Working Group an also the Working Group for IGF improvement.
The mailing list of SS Working Group is already activated and there are also some people who would be included, (listing names.)
And all the issues that we have mentioned so far that has been included in the Working Group, we think that they can support discussions that connect the original IGF mandate and the IGF process in the context of our further discussions on this type of preparation.
So I think it will be good to include Working Group in the track 5 of the live session. And I would suggest a few things in part of the IGF as a platform for cooperation and participation.
And last we are planning our first call for next week. Thank you.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks very much, TT. Please write to TT or myself or the Secretariat if you want to join the mailing list, or the Working Group. I think the will mailing list is already up. The details, you'll fine the details for subscribing to the mailing list on the MAG Working Group page.
Then if there are no questions for this Working Group, let's move on to the Working Group on outreach and engagement.
>> JUNE PARRIS: Hello, good evening. This is June Parris speaking for the Working Group. We have been in touch. We keep in touch over the last weeks. We are still looking at ways for the IGF and the Secretariat to improve cultural expression within the IGF community.
We are aware that some of the suggests made by the Working Group have been placed forward with the IGF communications team. This is a very good gesture by the Secretariat.
Due to COVID some of us are now engaged in other ventures, setting up watch groups, mental health support groups, community volunteering. This I think is all outreach and couples within the community. We are looking at more recommendations that will have a good effect on the worldwide community as well as the IGF.
There are so many meetings online on the effort to communicate and educate people on Google, Zoom, Teams, WhatsApp, Skype. Everybody is using all possible methods to communicate. Again this is part of outreach and engagement.
Sometimes it is not always good to get messages across in emails like, for example, today I lost the link to the Zoom meeting because it was caught up in so many messages, I couldn't find it.
Going forward, we want to complete what we set out to do by the time of the Polish IGF. Since we are not yet sure if it will be hosted as a face-to-face meeting we will examine good practice in case it is hosted as a virtual meeting because of the pan demic which is beyond our control.
We as the Working Group on outreach and engagement are recommending the following activities or procedures as a way forward to enhance outreach and couples to the global wider community: One, introducing workshops, webinars for beginners, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram on activity updates and any other social media platforms to crevice built. And outreach and feedback for the wider community.
With the available new funds for the website, a consultants should be hired to advise and create a more vibrant and interactive website. Information can be accompanied with images, pictures to attract attention.
A more colorful and navigable website. The website should be adaptable and responsive.
Number 4, due to the COVID-19 online virtual IGF online meetings should be increased to weekly meetings or do live talks on social media to send updates and announcements to the community.
Social media updates and announcements should be translated to at least four UN languages when shared. This can be carried out by calling for volunteers through the language Working Group.
Number 6, increase outreach through the NRI and the stakeholder groups and publish the work and the NRI and initiatives through the website and all social media accountings. We can also partner with other IFG-related initiatives with the IFF, ICANN, DIPLO, ISOC, features on the website to increase visibility. At this time more is needed to attract attention. There are so many unemployed, worried problems in our community that IGF may take back stage if we are not alert to this.
We look forward to continuing our work until the end of our term. And hope to pass it on to the next leaders. Especially the youth and the disabled.
If anyone has any more suggestions they can add to it. Thank you.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks very much for that, June. Please share it in writing. I think it will also be useful to incorporate some of your suggestions in the planned online session. And definitely in the redevelopment of the website. Thanks for the report and please share it with us online.
I don't see any --
>> ADAMA JALLOW: Hi, Anriette.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: I don't see a hand.
>> ADAMA JALLOW: I'm sorry I couldn't go to the queue but I want to add some things to what June has already said or explained about our report.
Thanks, June, that was very brilliant.
I wanted to add two things. Very important, we will share tomorrow to the blank list so we are encouraging everyone to put updates to what we have already done or review, or whatever.
What needs to be added for work with the activities or the work that we are doing.
We would also like to suggest or propose to the Secretariat to involve us with the process of building or developing the website where we can actually put in our suggestions and advise on how to really make it more viable and more adaptive to the global community.
So that is just briefly what I wanted to add. June has already said almost everything on the report. So I will give it back to you, Chair. Thank you.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you very much, Adama.
And the newsletter is not out yet. It will be out, I think tomorrow. I hope tomorrow. It will be useful if this outreach Working Group can assist with disseminating that and also to give the Secretariat feedback on the newsletter.
Let's move on to the final Working Group and that is the Working Group on language.
Mary, do you have an update for us?or anyone else from that Working Group?
(There is no response.)
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: I don't see anyone from the Working Group, but I do recall.
>> MARY UDUMA: Sorry, sorry, I was trying to unmute myself.
I was trying to unmute myself.
Okay. We met, the good news from the language Working Group is that the website is now going to be translated into the six UN languages thanks to the U.K. and the good news is that was shared by the Secretariat. We are very, very pleased.
The Working Group met on the 21st of April and we had to look at, review our mandate and we had a briefing from the Secretariat about volunteers that are trying to translate the Chair's Summary of 2019. And we had a deep discussion on the way forward. And to get more input from the Secretariat, including we should do a short question to know whether there are MAG members that actually need meetings to be translated or during the MAG meeting that we should translate it.
There was a discussion on funding, so we have not been able to do it. We also agreed that we should have the document, we have a working document with the -- secured for any pin put. If you have any questions, we can answer the questions.
There was an issue of whether it should be translated because during the last IGF webinar there was the issue of one of the participants responding in a language other than English. So it was French and only one of the participants translated for that participant that was responding in French.
So we had to look at whether it is possible for IGF going forward to be able to translate webinars into other language. And there will be the issue of which language. I think that is the most important thing, the only issue, which language. If you pick one of them, what happens to the others.
And then so that is what was discussed, trying to see about that in the future. That will come back, so when we are holding webinars, it could be translated.
I think the MAG Chair and the Secretariat would also have to look into that.
Then there was the issue of our work, whether the proposals would be as a pilot during this 2020 IGF meeting. Presented or organised in another language. And we came back to the issue of which language. And if you take on work for that. So we hope that we will be able to come up with a recommendation as soon as we are done with the evaluation that is involving all of us in the evaluation.
And then we agreed that Lucien, has some thoughts here in MAG and he, so Lucien from France will be Co-chair for the work of the language Working Group, and it will continue if and when I finish my tenure. And he gladly accepted.
The summary will be sent around soon and then we will get it to the Secretariat and also work with that. I am supposed to work with Lucien and the Secretariat to know whether actually there are mag members that will need translation or interpretation of MAG processes on MAG meetings.
And that is where, the other -- those were the things that we agreed or talked about during the meeting. So if I could ask if Lucien could also raise that. Any other questions, I label to answer, thank you.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, Mary, and thank you to the other Working Groups for your reports. I encourage you to send your reports before the meeting in writing so that MAG members can read them and prepare questions.
And of course, it would be nice to display them on the screen. Thanks very much, everyone, for your reports and do share them.
I think next, I don't see anyone in the speaking queue. I know it is late for many people. But hang in there, we are almost done.
Next we have updates from the Dynamic Coalitions, the NRIs and the BPFs.
And I start? I'll start it in that sequence. Can I give the floor to Jutta and Marcus, to update us on the Dynamic Coalitions? If there is anything new to report?
(There is no response.)
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Jutta, I see that you are in the meeting but possibly there is nothing to add or you can speak later.
Let's move on to NRIs. Anja, can I hand over to you to report on NRIs?
>> ANJA GENGO: Thank you, very much, Chair. I will summarize the work for the NRIs in a minute or two. The first is the impact of the COVID-19 on the scheduling of NRI meetings. This year I reported to the MAG maybe two meetings back, but for now what we know for sure is that we already have a few meetings that are going to be hosted online. So in addition to what I mentioned a few times, one of the first NRI meetings that were announced online, we have the West African IGF. Bolivia, and Guatemala IGF informed they will be hosting a series of IGF meetings. There are several creative solutions for structuring the agenda of online meetings, the IGF Secretariat in prepares with the NRIs is trying to gather the good practices and have them in one place so we can all learn from each other and make our online meetings be more effective.
With that, also a number of meetings are postponed until further notice. That has been shared on the IGF website in the list of NRI annual meetings that we are continuously updating that list as we receive the information from the NRIs.
The NRIs also are continuing to plan the main session that is focused on the Internet in emerging situations as well as the seven collaborative sessions. We had a very good meeting and the next one would be in the just next week. We will know tomorrow the exact date to define the policy questions and format of that session.
Another update relates to the cooperative mechanisms between the BPF and NRIs. The BPFs coordination group had a meeting with theirs. Various streamlining ideas between the NRIs and BPFs. The IGF Secretariat will follow up with an output document from that, also the MAG list for your information and for of course getting any useful feedback to it.
And finally we are very happy also that I believe it is the first time that one of the Dynamic Coalitions has approached the NRIs for possible cooperation. I speak about the DCADs, the Coalition on Accessibility and Disability related to the accessibility guidelines that they have that are also important documents for every host country of the IGF. So we are working on that and I am thanking Gunela along with a few colleagues taking the lead on this.
Finally I also mentioned to the MAG a few meetings back that the NRIs are planning to self organise to respond to the HOPDC, the report recommendations 5, concretely the IG plus model. Consultations. That product is not finalized. The survey has been published. The NRIs also hosted a webinar for the wider community. The survey is available for everyone to respond and colleagues will be working on summarizing those inputs and in early June presenting to the Co-chairman the report for further communication tools to the Secretary General.
The survey is open until the 21st of May, just to repeat that, and I share the link with the MAG in the chat. That will be all. Thank you very much for the opportunity.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you very much, Anja, for that report. I see no one in the speaking queue. If there are no questions for Anja?
Let's move on to the best practice forums. So cybersecurity, can we start with you?
>> BEN WALLIS: Yes, of course. This is Ben Wallis. Cybersecurity. I think I described at the last MAG meeting how we identified three workstreams for the BPFs this year. One looking at agreements of cybersecurity norms, going into more depth than last year. So that is depth and breadth but also taking any new norms that have been adopted in the last nine months.
And the second workstream looking at how norms are dealt with and the impact they have in other areas of the economy in other sectors and what we might learn from this.
And the third workstream where we are going to specifically look at how to increase outreach and bring in views of stakeholder groups that we have traditionally not managed to reach, including Developing Countries, youth.
We had an initial call. We identified BPF members who will lead each of the three workstreams, had an initial call with them and they are going to be scoping up some plans for the workstreams and kicking off the work in the next week or so. The idea being that by the middle of July, I think, we would have a Draft Report which we could publish for consultation and a call for inputs there were some ideas within the BPFs could we pivot, could we alter the work to think about the impact of COVID-19 and the importance of security and resilience in the networks, in the responses to the pandemic.
And we are looking at ways to integrate that into the existing work. My view within the BPF was to kind of scrap what we got approved by the MAG at the start of the year and do something completely different on cybersecurity and COVID-19, not be desirable and certainly require coming back to the MAG and we would lose a lot of the work and momentum already started.
We felt particularly happy seeing the letter from the under Secretary General to the last MAG meeting asking that we find space this year to discuss COVID-19. We felt that it was certainly possible and also desirable to fine ways to integrate that into the Working Group's plans for what to do this year. That is my update.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks for that, Ben. You could also organise a webinar on it. That is another way that the BPFs can respond to the demand for looking into the indications, the cybersecurity impacts PAP without that impacting your research process. We can discuss that in the context of online sessions.
>> BEN WALLIS: Thank you.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Next we have gender and access.
Maria Paz, at least you are reporting?
>> MARIA PAZ CANALES: Can you hear me? Hello?
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Yes, we can hear you.
>> MARIA PAZ CANALES: Yes, I am going to report for the gender and access BPF. We finally, able to convene our meeting with the core group to finalize the decision regarding how we want to proceed to adjust the proposal that was approved by the MAG in our meeting in January, in order to make it more able to fully address the topic and not be over comprehensive in the reap of the topic.
What we did, we keep as what we announced as the focus of this year, to a assess Internet related policies and spaces and that approach. We decided to focus this analysis of processes and policy spaces, looking in deeper way about how this processes and spaces handle the issues related with violence, harm, pleasure and consent -- pressure and consent in the online space.
This is also something that tries to set the ground between keeping the content that was originally announced and approved by the MAG, but in certain way also to tweak a little bit the orientation of the work during this year to take into consideration some of the main concerns that have developed in the course of the pandemic. So a lot of conversation are going on currently because of how the forces, we go to be completely online in many situations of containment in places in the world have put emphasis again in this regarding how gender violence is being manifested. But also the necessity to rescue and highlight the narrative of empowerment and building of narrative with the gender perspective that can be used the moment of this pandemic and the attention provided to the online interaction as a moment to highlight the need of having this new approaches and bring forward the need of doing more policy work at this time.
So this was shared in the list with the MAG members by Chengetai a couple of days ago, four days ago if I'm not mistaken.
And the updated version of the work plan has been uploaded to the section of the BPF in the IGF web page. And we will be having the first meeting to organise the actual work of this year on Thursday this week and we invite everybody who is interested in join force in this work to meet us in the first open call with the full list of the gender and access BPF participants.
Thank you very much. That's all what I had for now.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks very much, Maria Paz.
I don't see questions. And no hands. Let's move on to data and new technologies in an Internet context. TT, are you reporting for us?
>> CONCETTINA CASSA: Yes, thank you for giving me the floor. So the BPF on Internet contents at the last meeting last Friday, actually in this space the work plan is trying to identify issues or questions and concerns for which the BPF was to collect best practices.
So we actually have done a useful exercise during the last call trying to share some working definition on data governance and best practices. We actually have had a lot of debate and especially on governance meaning.
So in this case, I told you before we want to identify issues to collect in this practice. We thought it was important to share with the MAG and main community a draft of questions and concerns for which the BPF will seek clarity. We shared with the community four groups of issues related to data collection, data storage, to data and data sharing. And we have actually a lot of input and we are still collecting them in order to mechanize, try to understand which best practice to seek.
So I also want to have something on this. Wim, you want to add something else?
>> WIM DEGEZELLE: Thank you, TT. I would like to add one point. The BPF also had a discussion on how to deal with the COVID-19, whether that should be a topic dominating the BPF or dominating the agenda. And there was a very, I think interesting observation made that a lot of the COVID-19 and pandemic and May discussions related to tracking virus privacy and so on really helped to accelerate the debate. But most of the issues or the real problems or discussion points were there already before the pandemic outbreak. And therefore, there was the idea within the BPF that the whole COVID-19 should be addressed as or approached as a very important and interesting case study, but also it is important that the BPF looks for case studies that are not COVID related. So there is a good balance between the two. And also I think it is important that the BPF demonstrated that a lot of the discussions opinions were already there before the COVID-19 outbreak.
That's all. I think the next points I'm sure that TT would have mentioned. Otherwise the next call is already planned and that is the Friday, the 29th of May.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks very much to both of you for your report.
We have one left, local content. Carlos, are you reporting?
>> CARLOS ALBERTO AFONSO: Yes, I can report, thank you. Well, I have just posted a new description of the BPF. We had a very useful meeting with the new consultant with the participation of Anriette and the two Co-Facilitators.
We concluded that the original list which was proposed at the beginning of the year of issues for local content is too broad and very difficult to handle in terms of concrete results or good recommendations.
And we proposed to narrow the focus to issues related to Intellectual Property. And basically, what we are describing now is as a main focus is how to protect, preserve and remunerate creative work and collective wisdom in order to create a sustainable motion for the distribution for local content in the digital age.
This may involve intellectual ownership rights, communities, Intellectual Property rights, ownership of national or community identifiers of natural resources, protection of creative works, and so on.
I have uploaded to the general list and to the BPF list the document with the angles and our justifications and analysis, et cetera, that complete the proposal. There are basically six-points to be dealt with in terms of the Intellectual Property issues that are well described there.
And we are planning meeting to discuss this new approach for next week with our consultants and anyone who is interested in participating should just say so and communicate in the BPF local content list. We will be happy to receive all the contributions that we can.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you very much, Carlos.
Does anyone have any further questions about the BPF? Or any suggestions?
(There is no response.)
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: I see no hands. So let's move on to any other business.
And Ben has kindly offered -- I know there are questions that have been asked about the HLPDC process and how one can access information particularly about the other tracks.
So Ben, can you respond? Give people a bit of an update on where we are with the highly level panel on digital cooperation.
>> BEN WALLIS: Yes and apologies, my dog is also trying to give an update in the background.
>> BEN WALLIS: So I'm following the HLPDC process from Microsoft. And I am following a number of the different Round Tables, as they are called. These are virtual Working Groups composed of different stakeholders who have signed up to be involved since last December. So I have quite a good overview of the process and a rough idea of where it is heading next.
So there are eight Round Tables, these virtual Working Groups, looking at different recommendations that came from the High Level Panel. And their initial task was to provide the Secretary General with some guidance on what he might put into his roadmap on digital cooperation.
And they have all submitted input to the Secretary General's office for consideration as he drafts his roadmap on digital cooperation. Those inputs have not necessarily been shared equally with the stakeholders who are within the Round Table Groups. They have been submitted by the leaders of those round table groups, the champions. Each of the Round Table Groups is working in a slightly different way and some have been more transparent than others.
The one that we are particularly interested in discussing in relation 5AB on digital cooperation architecture, that is being led by the future Under Secretary General Hochschild and the German government and the UAE Government.
And I heard recently from Mr. Hochschild that he thinks that the roadmap will note the importance of a multi-stakeholder approach. The consensus towards expanding the IGF and addressing its deficits. Such as the need for more 51, more focused discussions leading to outcomes that reach policymaker at the national, regional and global levels.
It will be high level not towards an IGF plus approach. They will be contained within an options paper that is not going to come out until the Secretary General's roadmap. The option paper is being produced between the German government and the U.S. champions. They are setting out a vision for the various sections of the IGF plus and June or July is when they expect to share it.
So we would expect to see the Secretary General's roadmap in late May or early June.
And that is supposed to be, the timing of that is supposed to influence the resolution being drafted by the Member States ahead of the Secretary General's meeting in September, including declarations to commend the UN's 75th anniversary.
So I think the plan is for the UN General Assembly to go ahead in some format but it is too early to tell whether it will be partly or entirely online.
The UN 75 declaration is being negotiated by Member States led by Sweden and Qatar. It will highlight the challenges ahead for the world including technology. It will be two or three pages long and the Secretary General is hoping it will include some references to his call for digital cooperation.
So that is where the Round Tables were designed to discuss further the High Level Panel recommendations. The Round Table then gave input to the Secretary General's office which will come out with a roadmap for digital cooperation which will call for actions to be taken by UN agencies, governments, and stakeholders. And we do expect to see that roadmap in the next three or four weeks, I think.
That's helpful, I hope.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks.
>> BEN WALLIS: If you have any questions about recommendation 5A and B, German government and UAE, both of whom have MAG representatives, are the best place to go, Rudolph and Hana. Thanks.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks for that, Ben. Please do send any links if you have, that we can access to get more information on.
I can also add to Ben's report that the German government is working with the Internet and jurisdiction project on having two consultations, one in Latin America and one in Africa.
And I have already connected them with MAG members from the LAC region and as soon as they have finalized arrangements for Africa, I will connect them to MAG members from the African region. That is to feed into the options paper that Ben was talking about.
The NRI consultation that Anja talked about will also be feeding into the options paper. There is a little bit of a disconnect in that the roadmap will come out before the options paper, but the process is ongoing. So there is still time for us to participate in that.
That's also one of the reasons why I proposed that we have that track 5 or cluster 5 of online discussions on the IGF as a platform for collaboration.
Does anyone have questions for Ben or any other matters to raise under any other business?
There are no hands.
Nothing in the chat.
Oh, the Lac was today -- Maria Paz, can you give us a short update on that? We still have a few minutes.
>> MARIA PAZ CANALES: It was interesting. Apparently June thinks so also. I will say as a very compressed summary that the general feeling of the consultation that we had today is that it was very high agreement in the participants from the region that the model that everyone feels more appropriate if we are moving forward with the implementation of the recommendations of the report, the one highlight of the IGF plus. There was a lot of agreement that there are a lot of things that are in the other two alternative proposals that can be feed back in the vision of IGF plus, but there was a lot of agreement about the many of the issues that are raised regarding the effectiveness of the digital cooperation are linked to this idea of the necessity of having better coordination between the different spaces. And the role that the UN should play in trying to provide this more interconnected and in some way obtain a value connection with the initiatives related to Internet Governance or digital cooperation at large.
So the sense is rather than creating new institutions or new, the other issue should be in trying to find mechanisms to better coordinate what is already existent and bring forward the idea of how the local and regional initiatives should be stronger in input, but their consideration in the more global forums considering those are the ones that are closer to the people in the different places of the world and those are more accessible probably for having more diverse participation, especially thinking about small businesses and civil society and people working in the ground in many of these issues.
So I would say that those were my highlights from today. I don't know if June also who also was there can complement from her view of the meeting also. Thank you.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks very much, Maria Paz, and we will hear from the African consultation as well.
I think in general as the IGF we are in this position where we exist. We often are reminded of our imperfections. We are continuously trying to strengthen our work with limited resources. And I think we need to continue that.
But I think we also need to do more. I think the IGF is really the, and the MAG has maintained a level of commitment that is extraordinary. But I think that now is an opportunity for us to be more proactive, to come up with suggestions and also participate actively in the discussion.
It feels at times as if the IGF is discussed more by those outside it than those who are inside it. Which is good. I think it reflects the ownership that a very large number of institutions and individuals feel about the IGF.
But I think as the MAG it is important for us to be responsive and proactive incoming up with proposals.
But that is why we have the Working Group on strengthening and strategy. And I hope that once we have, we threw this chunk of work on the workshop proposals, that we can also get more involved in IGF, and action on IGF strengthening.
Thanks very much, everyone. For me --
>> MARY UDUMA: Hello?
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: I apologize if that was evident in my chairing of the meeting. Does anyone have contributions before --
>> MARY UDUMA: Yes, I raised my hand. I raised my hand.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Go ahead, Mary.
>> MARY UDUMA: Thank you. Thank you, Anriette. During the webinar by the NRIs on the response to the High Level Panel on digital cooperation report, 5A and B, Jovan made the presentation for IGF to come up with the response to the COVID-19 and also challenges, it is a good platform for the world to discuss and the world to engage.
So I know that the chair, you have started raising some points. So I want to, I thought I would raise that here as well. And see whether there are ways of getting engaged, showing responses, responses to the COVID-19, especially as it affects the Internet and Internet Governance and the human rights and privacy and also the issues that are related to working online and people working from home. And the fact that most governments were not ready for what we saw, and how our health systems are broken and how the Internet can help and how online can help.
I thought we could raise it and see where and how we could respond to if not the whole world, but our communities. Thank you.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, Mary. And please, I think it is important, it is a good opportunity. Please send suggestions to that thread that I started on online sessions.
I think what we need to take into account is that there are so many online sessions taking place at the moment. So many institutions are convening sessions including about the virus.
But I think there is a niche for us as the IGF to focus on Internet Governance and Internet policy issues. And I think we should find a way of doing that.
I think, for example, the issue of cybersecurity and working with our cybersecurity BPF, that would be one example.
Please, pick up on that and send responses. And by our next meeting I hope we can have a plan or at least for our first online session.
And if there is no one else with anything to add?
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Go ahead.
>> ADAMA JALLOW: This is Adama. Can I come in? Something came to my mind.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Go ahead, Adama.
>> ADAMA JALLOW: Yes, I wanted to do a quick recommendation regarding online activities and how much we engage. So I believe we do have a future agenda, and it will be a good thing to raise on doing updates and content for anti-discrimination. Able the Secretariat will really support that so we can be more out there in the social media when there is limited will access to face-to-face meetings for our activities.
This is something that I wanted to add. Thank you.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, Adama. Would this be for the disseminating information about the IGF?
>> ADAMA JALLOW: Yes, and the work of the MAG too.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: I think it is a really good -- really good idea. Especially if we have recorded webinars we can distribute those on the YouTube channel as well and we can do that for the Dynamic Coalitions and the BPFs.
Secretariat, let's take that to the communications team and look at how that can be picked up on.
And I think that is it. And our time is almost up.
I don't see any other hands. There is no one in the speaking queue.
Does anybody have any final comments?
(There is no response.)
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: No. Secretariat? Do you have any final comments? Can you tell us when our next call will be, please?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: No final comments from me E and our next call will be on Tuesday, 26th of May, at 1400 hours UTC.
>> CHAIR ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, Chengetai. And thanks, everyone. And good luck with the workshop review process. And please continue the discussions O. thanks to everyone who has done a report. Who worked in a Working Group and part of a BPF. Thanks a lot for your work.
Thanks. Good night, everyone.
(Chorus of thank you and goodbye.)