Twenty Second Planning Committee Meeting
59th Annual DPI/NGO Conference (6-8 September 2006)
Thursday, 29 June 2006-06-29 3:00pm – 5:00 pm
S-1027
1.0 Adoption of the Minutes
1.1 The Chairwoman moved that the troubleshooting committee be brought into the adoption of the minutes.
1.2 The agenda was adopted as amended.
2.0 Adoption of the minutes
2.1 Adoption of the minutes was postponed.
3.0 Subcommittee Reports:
3.1 Troubleshooting Committee
3.1.1 The Chairwoman raised several issues that had come from meetings between the Chairs, specifically regarding the conference schedule and speakers.
3.1.2 The Chairwoman expressed that there had been a disagreement, regarding defining the Conference as a NGO Conference, vs. an UN Conference.
3.1.2.1 There was a comment that the Conference has traditionally been a partnership between the DPI and NGOs, and therefore both a NGO Conference and an UN Conference.
3.1.2.2 There was a comment that there were several important distinctions between “NGO Conference” and “DPI Conference,” and that it had to be one or the other, for publicity’s sake.
3.1.2.3 There was a comment regarding the limitations of NGOs, specifically when working with the UN. Several historical perspectives were brought to the table, including those of past Conference Chairs.
3.1.2.4 It was clarified that DPI should make a statement for the record to clarify this issue.
3.1.2.5 There was extended discussion on this.
3.1.2.6 There was a comment regarding the title of the Conference, and that for 59 years it has been the “United Nations DPI/NGO Conference”.
3.1.2.7 There were several comments regarding partnership and collaboration, and the need for compromise.
3.1.2.8 A rep. from DPI noted that DPI much more support than just monetary. They provide all the technical and administrative support, as well as the venue.
3.1.2.9 Another member of DPI informed the committee that this Conference is a General Assembly mandated event and therefore, a UN Conference, in collaboration with the NGO/DPI executive committee. She also said, those were not her words but the words of member states.
3.1.3 The Chairwoman requested past Chairs to email her their perspectives and definitions of the working relationship between the Planning Committee and the DPI, and the co-Chairs.
3.1.4 The Chair moved that several issues be clarified by the troubleshooting committee.
3.1.4.1 The committee reported that there had been an impasse with the activities of the Internet Committee, and the role and shared tasks of the DPI. It was noted that the DPI had moved to “take over” the Internet Committee. The ramifications of this were not clear.
3.1.4.1.1 The Internet Committee reported that the committee had identified the role of the Internet Committee, which included: working with the website; liaising with the Art Center; working with the Committee to increase the functionality of the website and interest in the website; working with various technology people; working with the committee to better market the site; working with private sector contacts to raise funds and awareness of the Conference, etc.
3.1.4.1.2 The Committee noted that their responsibilities had been clear.
3.1.4.1.3
It was noted that there was no longer an
3.1.4.1.3.1 There was a
comment that there was a description of the
3.1.4.1.3.2 It was
clarified for the future that the
3.1.4.1.4
A member of DPI clarified the relationship between a
representative from
3.1.4.1.5 It was suggested that an operational/procedural document should be formed regarding the Conference.
3.1.4.2 It was clarified that internet communications would go from the Internet Committee to DPI.
3.1.4.2.1
There was a comment that the internet committee should
interact with the planning committee, and discuss the needs of the planning
committee with DPI. It was noted that DPI would be the liaison with the
3.1.4.3 It was noted that these procedural steps should be noted and turned into a guidebook for future conferences.
3.2 Networking Committee
3.2.1 The Committee reported that their efforts to plan events for the Conference were going well. They passed out several copies of a book on NGLS, and informed the committee that NGLS would distribute these books at the Conference.
3.3 Multigenerational
3.3.1 The Committee reported that the survey they distributed last week had been refined and finalized, and would be up on the website within the next few days. It was noted that 1440 people had registered for the Conference. 379 organizations had registered, and 302 would bring a young participant.
3.3.2 The Committee moved to discuss a new mailing to further encourage youth participation.
3.3.3 There was a comment regarding youth participation at the Conference in the “NGO Reporter.”
3.4 Resource Centre Support
3.4.1 It was reported that 1357 participants had registered online. By region, 69 were from Africa, 167 from Asia and Pacific, 35 from Eastern Europe, 46 from Latin America, 29 from the Middle East, 763 from North America and Caribbean, and 255 from Western Europe.
3.5 Midday Workshops
3.5.1 The representatives were not present, and there was nothing new to report.
3.6 Events and Fundraising
3.6.1 The Committee reported that they would soon learn what wine they would have at the Conference. They discussed that they had requested funds from sources that had expressed interest in the Conference in past years. The committee reported that there were several potential donors; however, they needed some specifics from DPI. The committee announced it would have meetings with DPI representatives to discuss those specifics.
3.6.2 It was noted that DPI had transferred $15,000 to the Executive Committee coffers.
3.6.3 There was a report regarding the initiative to gain airline sponsors. Some discussion followed this report. Apparently airlines have had a very bad year, and would have a hard time helping with any Conference funding initiatives.
3.6.4 Regarding the donation and travel packages, there was an update that although approved by the Executive Committee, this initiative would require the active interest of the Planning Committee to be successful.
3.6.4.1 There was some discussion on this, and how it might be supported.
3.6.4.2 It was requested that a link to information regarding these packages be available on the website. It was agreed.
3.6.5 There was some discussion regarding hosting the speakers, in particular with the younger generation. The Chairwoman suggested that, especially in light of the lack of funds, it would be prudent for members of the committee to host or help find hosts for speakers.
3.7 Media
3.7.1 The Committee had sent some correspondence, to which they received positive feedback. They also took down the sample press release from the website, as agreed to by the DPI and e-mailed it to all NGO associated with DPI and to everyone that registered for the Conference.
3.7.1.1 There was some discussion regarding press releases that had gone out.
3.7.1.2 The Chairwoman requested that she be put on any and all email lists regarding the Conference, as she had not received some Media correspondence.
3.7.1.3 There was a suggestion that the press release should be sent to each registrant of the Conference, if they did not already have it.
3.7.1.4 The committee reported that letters to universities and colleges were sent out and responses were starting to come in.
3.7.2 The committee reported that the film festival had not yet received its promised donation.
3.7.3 The Committee had been working with the financier of another film project, and would continue working with him. They were looking into having a documentary feature film one evening during the conference.
3.7.4 Regarding the Atlantic Monthly, a proposal had been developed; however, the speakers in this proposal correspond to an earlier draft of the Conference Program. The Committee would make sure that only confirmed speakers would be included in this proposal.
4.0 Discussion of Plenary and Roundtable themes
4.1 The Roundtable Committee reported that they had decided to write up a purpose, to communicate to the moderators, which would include a description of the moderators’ role. A representative from the committee read the purpose/strategy to the Planning committee.
4.1.1 There was some discussion on this, specifically regarding time allotments for speakers, and audience questions and participation. It was noted that the moderator would contact each speaker, and discuss strategy. Moreover the speakers and moderator of each event would get together before the event to discuss strategy further.
5.0 Recommendation of speakers
5.1 There was some discussion protocol regarding the proper titles of suggested and invited speakers.
6.0 Other business
6.1 There was a request to meet earlier in the day.
6.1.1 There was a vote that resulted in a 1pm meeting, contingent on a room.
6.2 It was noted that historical precedent should be brought to light when appropriate, for the sake of newer participants.
6.3 There was a comment and update regarding the use of a bell for peace during the Conference.
6.3.1 There was some discussion on this and other peace oriented initiatives.
7.0 Next meeting
7.1 Thursday 6, July 2006, from 3 – 5 pm (Conference room D)