[Internal-cg] GAO report

[Mueller, Milton L]

Jean-Jacques,
I believe your interpretation of this report is faulty, but will explain tomorrow if we have time to discuss it

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Internal-cg [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at ianacg.org] On Behalf Of
> Subrenat, Jean-Jacques
> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 4:40 PM
> To: Alissa Cooper <alissa at cooperw.in>
> Cc: IANA etc etc Coordination Group <internal-cg at ianacg.org>
> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] GAO report
> 
> Alissa & All,
> 
> my impressions after reading the GAO paper:
> 
> - Would this be some sort of writing on the wall? Seen from far-away Europe,
> it looks like a political intervention ABOVE the level of NTIA. About the ICG
> Proposal on avoiding capture, GAO writes: "To address this risk, stakeholders
> proposed changes that would empower the multistakeholder community to
> veto board decisions related to ICANN's plans and budget and to remove
> board members, among other things" might be an indication of what the
> higher political echelons are looking at.
> 
> - GAO seems to have doubts about NTIA's ability to evaluate the Proposal
> against the core goals it set out in 2014: "NTIA has not yet determined how it
> will evaluate the proposal against the goals".
> 
> - GAO "identified frameworks for evaluation that could provide tools to guide
> NTIA's evaluation", but gives no details.
> 
> - The most important point is in the very last sentence, where GAO states that
> "The Department of Commerce concurred" with its recommendation to NTIA.
> As NTIA comes under DoC, this means that NTIA has no option but to follow
> the GAO Recommendation.
> 
> - GAO mistakenly states that "a consensus-based proposal they plan to
> provide to the ICANN board by late fall 2015. The board will then provide the
> proposal to NTIA". As we know, it has been agreed that ICG will address its
> Proposal to the NTIA through ICANN Board, without any alteration by the
> latter.
> 
> Again, seen from outside the USA, the GAO statement carries the risk of
> shifting the goalposts in the middle of the game. I think the ICG is entitled to
> more information about the methods and tools envisaged by GAO, as well as
> the possible outcomes (scenarios?).
> 
> Best regards,
> Jean-Jacques.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Mail original -----
> De: "Alissa Cooper" <alissa at cooperw.in>
> À: "IANA etc etc Coordination Group" <internal-cg at ianacg.org>
> Envoyé: Vendredi 18 Septembre 2015 21:44:47
> Objet: [Internal-cg] GAO report
> 
> FYI, the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) has published its report
> on IANA Transition and ICANN Accountability -- http://gao.gov/products/GAO-
> 15-642
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org