• cifuturG2 consultation discussion table

last modified June 18, 2013 by facilitfsm

Chronology of Discussion from version V1 to version V2  of consultation 

After this phase there is a V3 proposal : table2  shows correspondence between questions in V2 and questions in V3...

item comments 1 francine sergio's answer comment 2 gina sergio 's answer comment 3 giuseppe  comment 4 francine version 2 sergio 
We are proposing a consultation process for reforming and relaunching the WSF International Council  And I realize how problematic it is to organize a consultation on ‘organizing’ before we have clear ideas on what a possible IC will be for, what it will have to do … According our proposal the question of: Mission and Functions, has to be a risult of the consultation process.  We are proposing a consultation process for reforming and relaunching the WSF International Council 
1/first The  consultation process has to be an open space available for all organizations participating and interested in the wsf as a space and  a social process 1/first The  consultation process has to be an open space available for all organizations participating and interested in the wsf as a space and  a social process
2/second The consultation process will have an address online to be easily accessible at world level all data document information contributions can be downloaded and shared 2/second The consultation process will have an address online to be easily accessible at world level all data document information contributions can be downloaded and shared
3/third The consultation process will need a time table aimed to provide the next IC in October the result with concrete proposals 3/third The consultation process will need a time table aimed to provide the next IC in October the result with concrete proposals
4/ Consultation space  set of documents  background 4/ Consultation space  set of documents  background
4/a/ list of ic members : name  type  country n of members ic member since 4/a/ list of ic members : name  type  country n of members ic member since
4/b/ documents on existing rules of functioning  - participation criteria 4/b/ documents on existing rules of functioning  - participation criteria
4/c/ evaluation documents 4/c/ evaluation documents
4/d/ reform proposals drafts –  4/d/ reform proposals drafts – 
5/targets for consultation process - identification 5/targets for consultation process - identification
1/ Ic members and observers(*?) So maybe, in the examination of the results, we might make a difference between ‘IC members’ and ‘non members’, otherwise we might get a biased view. Yes, I agree, in the analysis of the results it's important to divide for the different type of organizations. 5-1/ Ic members and observers(*?)
2/participants at last 3 IC meetings ( tunis - monastir – Dhaka )  5-2/participants at last 3 IC meetings ( tunis - monastir – Dhaka ) 
3/organizations registered in the 30 convergence assemblies of tunis  5-3/organizations registered in the 30 convergence assemblies of tunis 
4/ organizations and individuals interested in the process 5-4/ organizations and individuals interested in the process
6/First preliminary questions  - rescope as  "about progress of wsf process"  6/First preliminary questions  - rescope as  "about progress of wsf process" 
a/Does the wsf process need a permanent body to coordinate and manage yes or no  some explanation might be useful. Personally, I think this is not possible with a meeting of 200 people. If past experience has taught us anything, I think it is that you need some kind of ‘leadership’, and by that I mean one or a couple of persons who take initiatives, not ‘leading’ in the proper way, just decide on agendas and procedures; and on the other hand you need some continuity in order to remain coherent.  Yes, I agree. Open consultation for a defined body !!!  There are different solutions: if we decided for a large IC may be we need a Secretariat or Executive body. If we decide for a suitable IC (50-100) may be it's enouth to work with Commissions and 1-2 persons from the Commissions can become a restricted coordination body, etc. etc.  But, again, this discussion have to be realized after the consultation process. What means not to have a permanent body, in relation to the tasks that have to be donde on preparatoin of the wsf events?   In this question, for the ones that say no, we can ask for which alternatives they propose? Yes, We agree,we have to add this point. Done in Version.2 6-a/Does the wsf process need a permanent body to coordinate and manage yes or no
If NO, please, write HOW and WHO will manage and  coordinate  the Social Forum process and events.
Answer: TEXT max 200 characters
b/Has the permanent body to be formed as an open assembly or by membership  if membership go on  6-b/Has the permanent body to be formed as an open assembly or by membership  if membership go on
□ Open Assembly
□ Membership (if membership go on)

c/ Does the name remain IC yes or no 6-c/ Does the name remain IC yes or no
If NO, please,write your proposal:

7/ questionnaire  about a operation of worldwide body  related to wsf process rescope as  7/ questionnaire  about a operation of worldwide body  related to wsf process
7/1/ IC mandate is  service 1 to 5   is political  1 to 5 - propose a verb to express role of this body -  The mandate of the IC: service or political? Political in what sense?  Maybe  I prefer the idea of service, facilitation, etc. instead of political, otherwise more power apetites can grow I agree with you. First we have to insert some more details, as Pierre suggestion (we had a long telephone call...), inserting a list of different type of service with the possibility to a multy-choose option; We do not agree ona political rol, but we thougth to give this option for a democratic approach; if we decide to mantein, I agree that we have to ask: " please define does it mean a political mandate". (We are adding these integrations to the questionaire format for a Version.2) 1. i am uncertain that the "political" option is fully congruent with the WSF charter and with what the IC has been doing (or trying to do) since its inception. Of course one can define political in many ways but i think the IC cannot but be moved by other than a spirit of service. More in specific, it seems to me that a certain ambiguity on the meaning of the political could generate conflicts with the practice of the open space itself. IE there could be an ambiguity between a WSF as open space and its IC (smaller, less representative, elitist or whatever people might highlight about it) as a political instrument.  I wanted to come back on the point of the ‘mandate’: I do not see any opposition between ‘service’ and ‘political’, in the sense that I think the possible political – or should we call it ‘intellectual’ work the IC could do necessarily has to be at the service of the participants of the WSF. I refer back to our discussion in Dhaka, where we talked on how we could ‘re-dynamize’ the IC and bring back the intellectuals that once came regularly to our meetings, but now have all left us. There are also new and younger intellectuals that I think could play a very important role in the IC.
What I dream of is intellectual (political) debates on the world political situation, the ‘state of arts’ on the thematic that always are on the agenda of the WSFs. The point is that not all social movements have the capacity of making broad political analysis, certainly not beyond their own thematic interest. What I think of is not a debate in order to give ‘one political line’, on the contrary, I mean academics presenting the different lines of thinking about a specific topic, be it debt, social matters, climate change, energy, and so on. By giving some kind of intellectual ‘guidance’, showing the choices we are all faced with, the IC could greatly help the agglutination process and finally the convergence process. If movements know what line they want to follow, they can look for others in the same direction.
The other way of achieving this goal would be to organize ‘organized events’ on each thematic axis e.g., or preparing ‘TEDs’, that is the ‘you tube’ type short presentations that could be made available to all.
7/1/ IC mandate is  service 1 to 5   is political  1 to 5 - propose a verb to express role of this body -
service (box 1)  political  (box 1)
BOX 1 mandate
SERVICE:
□ General secretariat
□ Organization of IC meetings  
□ information and communication management
□ supporting local/regional Committees hosting W/Th SF
□ ________________ (others)

POLITICAL: (please, detail wich political mandates has to have the IC)
□ _______________
□ _______________
□ _______________
7/2/ representativeness  - BOX2 one combination from Regional thematic national gender membership fee capacity of mobilization others yes 1 to 5/no The question on the matrix: 1) and 2) are not clear to me. What is meant?  Finally: does the IC have to be representative? Matrix 1: is the questionnaire - That is the question, the consultation process will give us the answer.
Matrix 2: is the box related to the second question on "representativeness"; each organization can define own criteria of representativeness; defining criteria/labels and defining the wheight (1 - 5)
The other question we have to solve, maybe only after the consultation, is how to make decisions about the future IC, especially concerning members  7/2/ representativeness  - BOX2  one combination from Regional thematic national gender membership fee capacity of mobilization others yes 1 to 5/no
3/ term mandate  1Y 2Y 3Y ren/no ren 3/ term mandate  1Y 2Y 3Y ren/no ren
4/membership fees  yes no 4/membership fees  yes no
5/openmeetings  yes no Maybe we can also make a mix of ‘open meetings’ and ‘closed meetings’: as we  did in the past and also our last meeting in Tunis: only members get the floor.  Yes, it's an open question. 5/openmeetings  yes no
6/how to make decision  consensus  majority  How to take decisions: the Charter says by consensus. We are planning to change the Charter?  This requires a much more deep discussion, and I don t think we can do it through this consultation. No, we don't think and we don't want to change the Charter, but in the reality there have been cases where there were different opinions and positions, and we don't have any regulation to deal these cases. May be we can change the Question: " how to deal in case of different positions, after discussed in plenary ? " Please think on it.  6/how to make decision  consensus  majority
BECOMES
How to take decision after discussed inPlenary, if there are different positions ? (do we give options ?)

7/ Numbers of members 100 200 300 : I would introduce the choice for ‘50’ Yes. Done. 2. I'm not sure I understand the 50 100 200 300 members number option. Are we considering reforming the IC starting from its membership? I mean, the IC has around 200 members on paper. Is that membership going to be reviewed? If yes how? I understand that many organisations in the IC list have already given up on the forum etc. but i'm not sure how the restructuring of the membership would happen 7/ Numbers of members 50 100 200 300
8/can ic nominate a secretariat  yes no  -reword  which are the forms of operation of the body  - options and "other" - and their permanence  If not, how are we thinking the tasks of support for the facilitation of any coordinating body can be done? So, also here it is possible to ask for which are the alternatives? We agree on this remark. Done in Version.2 8/can ic nominate a secretariat  yes no 
No (if not, please write hot to deal at operative level: Text max 200 characters)


-
reword  which are the forms of operation of the body  - options and "other" - and their permanence
9/which commissions does iC need 9/which commissions does iC need
final  observations  Maybe a hint, for Sergio: try to think of whether you would want this or that rule also for your trade union? May be we can make some test for verifying the validity of the Questionaire !!  Ishould be the first. 3. This is the tiny idea. I always wanted to do something like this but never had the chance. Here it is. I think it would be great to interview all the people in the IC list with a questionnaire of this kind, rather than having only a web format. I once thought i could do it as part of an academic research with the support of my institution. I wanted to get the telephone numbers and call each and everyone of us and interview us on issues similar to those of the questionnaire, but also on others, more general on the WSF and on its future. Especially interesting i thought it would be to interview those who have left the IC and the forum... ok this is just an idea... but i think it would be feasible in not too much time really...

xx