Twentieth Planning Committee Meeting (Co-Chairs Only)
59th Annual DPI/NGO Conference (6-8 September 2006)
Thursday, 15 June 2006
3:00pm-5:00pm
Conference Room B
1.0 Pre-Meeting Comments
1.1 The latest draft Conference Schedule was passed out. There were a substantial amount of changes to the document from the previous week.
1.2 The Chair said that his Co-Chair had been kept well-informed of all developments, and would continue to be in the future. He also emphasized that he looks forward to her return.
1.3 The Chair thanked members of the planning committee who had helped with the new conference schedule. He emphasized that there had been significant progress made in bringing focus to the programme.
2.0 Adoption of the Agenda
2.1 The agenda was adopted.
3.0 Adoption of the minutes
3.1 There was a comment that the minutes had been polished from their original draft.
3.2 The minutes were adopted.
4.0 Discussion of Plenary and Roundtable themes
4.1 Representatives from DPI reported that there had been several meetings between DPI and members of the Planning Committee over the previous week, to discuss speakers and panel blurbs. It was emphasized that the meetings had gone well and were informative.
4.2 The representative from DPI stated that the panel and roundtable blurbs were re-drafted to add focus and welcomed suggestions.
4.3 It was noted that several DPI suggestions were included in the new draft Schedule, to include increased participation in multi-stakeholder panels.
4.4 The DPI reported that there was a need to include more UN representatives.
4.5 The DPI reported that they had tried to preserve conference themes, but had altered the language. They went through the Schedule and explained the reasoning behind their changes.
4.5.1 They proposed merging 3 and 4 to one panel on NGO partnerships, because these roundtables were so similar, with a separate roundtable on Human Security and Peace building.
4.5.2 There was a comment that speaker places in the program would be reconsidered and adjusted appropriately as invitations are accepted or declined.
4.5.3 There was a comment that previous attempts to define “human security” had produced an eclectic mix of distinct concepts.
4.5.4 There was a comment that roundtables 3 and 4 did have to be separated. The commenter also stated that there should be an emphasis on the destruction of infrastructure in conflict and post-conflict areas. She said that human security was not just freedom from conflict, but rather had much to do with economic opportunities.
4.6 The Chair asked the floor for their feedback on the suggestion to merge roundtables 3 and 4.
4.6.1 It was clarified that unless these are merged, we would not be able to add another roundtable.
4.6.2 There was some discussion regarding this merger, including the establishment of a separate roundtable on human security.
4.6.3 Regarding ‘human security,’ there was a comment that the MDGs had neglected economic emphasis, including decent employment and the ‘lost generation:’ young people who were not or had not been trained to enter or participate in the working world.
4.7 The Chair noted that this issue need be resolved in a timely fashion. The Chair proposed a vote.
4.7.1 There was a comment that Michaela would be needed for a decision like this. It was decided to take a vote and ask Michaela by e-mail for her thoughts and comments.
4.8 There was a comment that the Peace-Building Commission was a major achievement of the last few years, and that it would be valuable to include the ideas behind the Peace-Building Commission in the Conference.
4.9 By unanimous vote, the committee agreed to merge the two roundtables.
4.10 There was a comment regarding mentioning MDGs specifically in the blurbs, because this language would better clarify what we are trying to achieve.
4.10.1 There was a comment that numbering the goals would be unnecessary, as the MDGs had been emphasized in three past conferences. It was implied, this commenter said, that these goals are interconnected and needed no distinct or explicit emphasis.
4.10.2 There was a comment that “UNFINISHED BUSINESS” should be clarified, in its reference to the MDGs.
4.11 There was a comment that there was no Conference summary, overview, or introduction.
4.11.1 A representative of DPI presented a draft “introduction”. She also stated that the “introduction” referenced above had never been available at this point in past Conferences.
4.11.2 The Chair clarified that the document referred to is the blurb that reflects the spirit and intention of the conference.
4.12 There was a comment that, because most of the participants would already be familiar with the MDGs, then the interrelatedness of the MDGs should be emphasized.
4.13 There was a concern regarding roundtable 1, that we should address the education system that fails to prepare people to work in the globalizing world.
4.13.1 Representatives of DPI believed that this idea was present in the blurb.
4.14 The Chair suggested that the aim of the Conference Schedule blurbs was to serve as a vehicle to encourage critical thought and frame discourse for the speakers.
4.15 There were some comments regarding the gender-based approach to HIV and AIDS in roundtable 2.
4.15.1 There was a comment that the original intent of the title was to emphasize gender equality and gender issues as an essential element of human security.
4.15.2 There was a comment regarding “the changing face of AIDS,” which was a conference held the previous week. It had indicated that children and women are most vulnerable to the disease.
4.15.3 There was further discussion regarding the title and content of this roundtable.
4.15.4 There was a comment regarding an effective partnership between the UN and NGOs to produce and strengthen a document regarding AIDS.
4.15.5 It was agreed to leave the blurb and title as it was.
4.16 Regarding roundtable 5, there was some discussion around genetically modified foods.
4.17 Regarding roundtable 6, there was a comment that the reworking of the blurb was very well done, and it had preserved the spirit and integrity of the previous blurb while also clarifying what needed to be clarified.
4.18 The Chair expressed his hope that his co-Chair would agree with the adjustments and corrections of the program. He also said that this would be the official program.
4.19 Joan Kirby thanked the representatives of DPI for maintaining the themes of the panels during re-writes. Others agreed.
5.0 Recommendation of Speakers
5.1 There was a comment from the floor regarding adjusting where invited/accepted speakers might talk. The Chair said he did not believe it would be problematic with speakers, to move them around appropriately in the program.
5.2 There was a suggestion that the Archbishop of Canterbury be moved to roundtable 6.
5.3 There was some discussion regarding the opening session, and who should be invited. From a list of six world leaders, the SG’s office requested that the committee chose one.
5.3.1 The Chair suggested that plan A be that Mr. Mandela and Graca Machel speak via video and Mr. Clinton speak in person. Plan B would include one of the six world leaders and/or Mr. Al Gore.
5.3.2 Some members moved that Mr. Gore be put on the top of the B list.
5.3.3 It was suggested that Mr. Clinton’s availability be clarified before inviting Mr. Gore.
5.4 Representatives from the DPI clarified that inquiring interest and availability of potential speakers is necessary; however, personal invitations to potential speakers were not acceptable, as they led to misunderstandings and embarrassment for the both the UN and the speakers.
5.5 There was some discussion regarding the keynote speaker for the closing session, potentially including the suggested world leaders.
5.6 There was a comment suggesting having a woman at the closing session.
5.6.1 The Chair commented that there is a female president of the GA, who would be a very valid candidate to address the conference.
5.7 It was noted that there was an A list and a B list, and that the DPI would proceed on speaker invitations.
5.8 There were some questions and concerns regarding where various speakers were in the Program.
5.8.1 There was a comment that quite a number of invited speakers did not have speaker forms, which made it difficult to evaluate speakers. The commenter said that this was part of the challenge to choose speakers, and would continue to be challenging in the effort to produce a B list.
5.8.2 A DPI representative clarified that some of these speakers did have contact information sheets, but that there were inconsistencies between speaker affiliations with organizations and institutions, recommendations of placement in the program, and what materialized in the program and invitations.
6.0 Subcommittee Reports: were postponed until the next meeting due to lack of time.
6.1 Trouble Shooting
6.2 Networking
6.3 Multigenerational
6.4 Midday Workshops
6.5 Events and Fundraising
6.6 Media
6.7 Internet
6.8 Resource Centre Support
7.0 Other Business
8.0 Next Meeting
- Thursday, 22 June 2006 (Venue Room S-1027)