4th DCAD meeting

28 September 2011 - A Dynamic Coalition on Access in Nairobi, Kenya

Session Transcript

September 28, 2011 - 12:30PM

DC : Access and Disability


The following is the output of the real-time captioning taken during the Sixth Meeting of the IGF, in Nairobi, Kenya. 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 to understanding the proceedings at the session, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.



    >> PETER MAJOR: Good afternoon.  Welcome to this fourth meeting of the DCAD.  I'm told that some of you have to leave at 2:00, and some of us will arrive a bit late.  So we have an agenda today.  The main point is the finalization of the mission statement or what I would really call the statement for the main session Access and Diversity. 

   We shall have some inputs from the two workshops.  Workshop 136, probably Shadi will be a bit late.  And we shall have input from Cynthia from workshop 137.  And naturally, all of us contribute to this input. 

   Well, there will be other highlights to be added to the text, and we shall finalize this mission statement or statement.  And eventually, if we still have some time, we shall talk about the work for next year. 

   After any other business, we try to close at 2:30 because we don't really have the room any further. 

   So basically, that is the agenda.  Now we have to approve that. 

   >> Peter, I move that we approve the agenda. 

   >> PETER MAJOR:  Okay.  So well, having approved the agenda, let me give you some thought about how we are going to work today.  There are some circumstances which -- which are of some concern.  Originally, we thought that this statement will be delivered by Shadi, and we thought that he would be a part of the panel of the General Session on Access and Diversity.  However, we were told that he won't be on the panel, which means that he can't deliver a statement on the panel.  And if he's delivering something or if any one of us is delivering something from the floor, probably we will be limited in time and in space.  So probably we should be thinking about finding some different form for the statement itself. 

   Let me suggest that eventually, since it's required from all workshops and main sessions as well, to report back to the IGF, we have our statement as an annex or attachment to this report. 

   It will have two positive outcomes.  First of all, we will have time to finalize the reports at some later point by the time the report will be ready.  And it will give us also an opportunity, which is more important, to deliver our message in the written form and to have it made known to the bigger community. 

   My quick evaluation of the two workshops, even though there was substantial attendance and I was very happy to see that our compare to Lithuania, what we had in Lithuania there was some kind of hope because there were young people, even very young people, who were attending, and we were very glad that there is awareness, a raising awareness, of the problems and concerns we have with accessibility issues.  I still think there is some work ton done on this, that is to raise awareness, and I hope next time we are going to have our workshops, there will be even greater attendance, but we have a lot of work to do up to then. 

   So having said that, I pass the floor to anyone who asks for it, and ask for your opinion about my idea of just forming some kind of statement, a draft statement, which may be finalized if you agree to that at some later stage, eventually, offline or during a conference call sometime.  And it will be a kind of attachment to the general report of the Main Session of Access and Diversity. 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: Peter, I think we all agree we do not have time to write a detailed statement during this half hour and that given the fact that we are not even going to have the opportunity to explicitly say those words at the Plenary, I think maybe it is a good time right now to throw out -- to start with the document that we had where everybody's inputs were.  If there's anything major right now you want to be sure that's in it, we need to do that.  But the other piece of this is maybe we need to talk about what that -- that five-minute statement might be before the body tomorrow, that we have a -- and that might be this, that we have a statement that we will ask for it to be included in the record.  We won't tell them it's done.  We just say we have a Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability statement.

   And I would also add that what we should say -- and this is backed up by an email from Andrea today -- given all the fires that had to be put out between 7:30 and 9:00 today -- these are the words of Andrea -- the problem should be brought up -- the accessibility problems that we experience should be brought up in a delicate way and added to the mission statement, especially the issue that host countries need to work with the Dynamic Coalition to -- she wants us to educate and to not recriminate. 

   So I really believe we have to make a statement, included in our comment to the Plenary, that there were serious problems with accessibility, and we appreciated the move of -- the move of our Dynamic Coalition business meeting from the roof to an accessible location.  And to remind the Plenary that on January 24 in 2007, the General Assembly passed a resolution, 61/106, to the UN Secretariat General regarding the need to ensure the accessibility of facilities and services of the entire UN system.  And we need to point that out in the statement. 

   Because you know, the fact that they may not have the resources to renovate is one major thing, but you don't schedule events in an inaccessible place.  You find a way to put them in an accessible location.  And there was so much lack of planning on this. 

   And what -- Shadi, maybe you -- since you are going to be our voice, maybe you have a way that can delicately put it forward.  What would you like to share? 

   >> SHADI ABOU-ZAHRA: Sorry for sitting behind many of you, so I hope you don't get -- twist your necks or something.  Anyway, so I will try to have a long sleep today and wake up fresh tomorrow in order to be able to convey the delicacy aspect.  (Laughter). 

   For me, it was kind of -- I don't know.  I think it was kind of interesting to meet Hiroshi today in the morning at the security line because it was also him who I had lovely adventures with in Brazil back then.  Remember, Hiroshi, when it was raining, and the registration was also outside, and we had to go through torrential rain to get the pass, and very similar experiences, yes.  Very similar experience in terms of, you know, security and accessibility, both very important, and both can be aligned.  It needs a bit of thinking about and a bit of creativity, but you can make it work. 

   And back then, we did report on that, and you know, we reported ever since Athens.  We've been writing reports.  But it somehow still seems to get lost. 

   But anyway, I think what would be really important -- I think, Cynthia, you may have said that yesterday -- is to really have a spokesperson or -- not a spokesperson, but each country host should have somebody to work with.  I mean, here they had Judy, who could have maybe served as a resource person to help advise them on some of the things while they were planning, may have been able to catch a lot of the issues in advance. 

   I don't know if for future IGFs, maybe, as you say, the main message would be that they work more closely with us.  Maybe we can identify people who may be able to help them, either from DCAD directly or from the DCAD cloud.  We may know people in the areas who may be able to help them. 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: I know I've already said something, but I also want to say that we need, in the Plenary, to say that the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability came to do a Workshop on Best Practices for Accessibility and Mainstreaming the Disability Perspective, and that that was quite a hurdle to do.  And for that reason, these -- we are concerned and are asking for our statement and input to be in the record and point to the General Assembly resolution. 

   There are a lot of things that we can look at what could have been done better, and I actually talked to the U.S. Ambassador for ICT last night at the U.S. Ambassador's residence.  I said I want to give you a head's up of what's coming.  They put us on the roof.  And he -- you know, so we talked about it. 

   So we have to say something.  This is -- and the last part -- and I'll get off -- is this piece.  The Convention, in mainstreaming the disability perspective, requires that when you have a panel talking on access and diversity and you don't have anyone there representing the disability community, you're violating the -- you're violating the WSIS principles, the Tunis Agenda, and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. 

   >> SHADI ABOU-ZAHRA: Again, it's the legal perspective, obviously.  But in addition, just pragmatically, you're spending a lot of effort and you're getting it wrong, and if you just have a resource person, you will be so much more effective, and you will be complying with the --

   >> (Off microphone)

   >> PETER MAJOR: Okay.  So let me summarize.  So what Shadi said, eventually we should include in the report the advantage of having a resource person to -- to help the Dynamic Coalition in its work, and probably we can put that and we should put that. 

   I tend to agree with Andrea, to -- not to be too harsh, and probably we should just reverse the things, saying that in spite of the original difficulties they may have had to face with, that is putting in an inaccessible place, even people without disabilities is almost inaccessible, let's put in a positive way that we are really appreciating the effort, though it came a bit late, that we were put in a place which was accessible.  That's one thing. 

   The other thing is probably for the future and for the future organisers to keep in mind, and eventually this might be the point where you can mention the relevant UN Resolution, the relevant WSIS points, and so on and so forth.  But I would -- wouldn't like to be very negative. 

   As for the participation of Shadi on the panel, it's very regrettable that we couldn't get him on the panel.  It's -- I still think it's a large way of misunderstanding what is happening.  Let me share with you the information I had from the open consultation back in Geneva when we compared the workshops and we really fighted for the workshops. 

   People who were charged with the access and diversity issues had no notion -- and let me stress that -- no notion what accessibility means for disabled people.  And it's very sad.  That was the first time they were faced with that.  And we have to be a bit thoughtful.  Why is that?  And we should find ways of raising awareness.  So if the organisers, the moderators, aren't really aware what's going on, we can't expect them to take proper decisions, and probably this might be one of the reasons Shadi was -- isn't on the panel. 

   The other reason might be that if I remember on the panel, there is a large representation from the African continent, and this might have been one of the reasons.  I hadn't talked to Theresa Swinehart, who is the comoderator, but I expect that that might have been one of the reasons as well. 

   So these two reasons have contributed, but we should call their attention to this fact, that in the future -- because I think it's too late.  It's too late.  It has been arranged and it's like that.  So in the future, this aspect should be placed in the right context. 

   >> Do you know where the next IGF is going to be? 

   >> PETER MAJOR: Well, There are some talks it will be in Baku in Azerbaijan, but it hasn't been accepted fully.  Azerbaijan seems to be the only candidate for that. 

   >> I think you're correct to raise the larger picture.  To the extent that a host country has ratified the Global Treaty, to the extent that they will have sessions which the Dynamic Coalition will participate, to the extent that they'll have participants in the audience who will need accessibility beyond those attending the Dynamic Coalition session, I think it does everyone a disservice, you know, to have the kinds of problems that were experienced today. 

   So as -- you know, to put that in the best light or to raise that larger picture, I think, would be a good frame.  I think the solution, as you all suggested, is not only to identify potential resource person in host country who has the technical know-how, the capacity, the professional and personal experience to help those countries address the issues in advance, but I think the DCAD may also want to offer up one or more members, as soon as the host country is identified for the next IGF, to actually begin working directly, if it's not too much of a hardship. 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: One interesting difference with this IGF is that a UN facility, so they are already under a mandate, which is different than, for example, in Vilnius, in Lithuania, which that country has a different system because it's in a convention hall, so that point is very well taken.  And I agree.  I mean, I think you get a lot more with honey than with slamming people, but they do need to have -- I think they do need to have this fact in there regarding mainstreaming the disability perspective.  The context of the access and diversity should always include a stakeholder from the disability community. 

   >> PETER MAJOR: Just before Shadi, so in that case, let's separate the issue into two.  We are talking about the UN facilities on one hand and host countries on the other -- host country on the other.  And probably this time, the larger part of the blame should go to the UN itself. 


   >> PETER MAJOR: Because the facilities are of the UN.  And probably if we use some stronger words about the UN itself, we are not going to hurt very much the sensibility of the organisers. 


   >> PETER MAJOR: Yes, Shadi. 

   >> SHADI ABOU-ZAHRA: I'm also hearing one thing is the organisational aspect.  Like, you know, the security, the -- you know, the physical access, putting the thick on the roof and this kind -- the thing on the roof and this kind of stuff.  But at the same time, the access and diversity issue we were talking about earlier, I think that's more a content issue that I think goes back to the MAG and to the actual IGF organisers, I'd say, to actually define it in such a way that it includes accessibility and to make sure that, you know, that the present -- that the moderators and the sessions are accepted and so on include accessibility. 

   I think those might be two separate things, or what do people think of that? 

   >> I think you are all correct, and I think to the extent that it can be dissected, to the extent that we can do some separative surgery and lake the issues out, UN, not UN, host country that has ratified the Treaty versus not; you know, capacity of resources on-site in the host country versus those that could be supplemented with DCAD folks; content that needs to be infused and merged.  I think, you know, drawing it out, doing that type of separative surgery, laying out the issues that way for them, is probably going to be a much more helpful map than anything else because of the spectrum of possible combinations for the next event. 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: Think about what happened in Rio.  Shadi mentioned being in the rain in registration line.  Then think about Hyderabad, we had a declaration regarding accessibility advice for IGF and for the MAG.  Well, this seemed to be an ongoing thing that we'll continue our role in providing accessibility insight -- (Laughter) -- in what needs to be done, and you're right, the MAG needs to somehow be more fully informed, especially in light of what Peter shared, that they didn't know what accessibility really was. 

   >> PETER MAJOR: Let me add some thoughts on that.  As I have already sent to you that I've been selected as Chair of the working upon the improvements of the IGF, and I will stress this point in our work.  So that's for the future.  That's for the future.  I can promise to you that this is -- is on my mind. 

   As for the statement, probably we should really make up our minds how we are going to go about it.  Are we going to be very Harsh on the UN? 


   >> PETER MAJOR: Or are we going to be just to the point reminding the UN to the obligations and the host country?  They have signed the Convention.  Cynthia? 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: I think that's fine, and all you need to do is say we came to do a workshop on best practices in accessibility and mainstreaming, and the two issues were we had to request a removal of our meeting from the roof to the -- to the two -- to Conference 4.  When you give examples, it helps them understand. 

   And then to say we really want to convey our concern that the definition of access and diversity Plenary should include (Indiscernible) from disability community. 

   >> How you doing?  Yeah, it's working.  I've been listening, and we're talking about splitting up in various ways are, this way and the other, but I think back to how we split up access to many things, like to the Web or to the written word, we split up to sort of what is the infrastructure and what is the content.  And it seems to me that's a useful way of splitting our problem here. 

   One is the infrastructure is physically getting in and the physical accessibility, and the second is what is the content?  And the content would include where do we get to speak, like at the main sessions.  And I would suggest splitting it in that way. 

   I think we should be not afraid to point out our statements for the last five years, and each year we've been given a promise yes, it will be better next year.  So I wouldn't be afraid of saying that.  In a nice way, but I wouldn't be afraid of saying that. 

   And the last point that I think was made very strongly yesterday by Ginger, which I thought hit a really strong cord with me and I think will hit a really strong cord tomorrow.  If you look at something like the tools that were developed for remote participation, they were developed initially for people with disabilities.  They were seen initially as extra cost.  But now that they've been implemented, they're seen as an enormous benefit for all participants and for people who are participating remotely, not just people with disabilities.  And I think you'll find that if they look at this question of accessibility, they may see it as a cost now, but they'll find the same way, that it eases the flow of people around the building, and it eases the -- the movement of equipment and all of that sort of stuff.

I think you'll find in the same way as remote participation that it will benefit all delegates, not just us.  I think we should take those approaches. 

   >> I think both Shadi and members of DCAD already mentioned, it's not just the physical accessibility of the facilities, but also how the IGF ought to take accessibility to an important point. 

   And so far as I said, DCAD is not even listed among other Dynamic Coalitions from the IGF Web site.  Have you noticed that?  Could you find DCAD from the IGF Web site?  This issue we have already, from Secretariat, we have written the idea of Secretariat, we have reminders several times, and I have been doing so ever since I took over this mandate, and it's not corrected so far. 

   And also, for Shadi's name listed as a resource person for the main session, back to our secretary exchanges with IGF, secretary we have done such a lot of emails, and they didn't really take much action.  So I really don't know how we could be not so harsh on this point. 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: I have a question.  You keep saying the IGF Web site does not have the coalition listed.  But when I go to the IGF Web site and go to the Dynamic Coalition, there is a link to the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability.  It's the second link.  Is that what you were --

   >> (Off microphone). 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: And then at that link, is it blank?  Is it gone?  The link is there. 

   >> (Off microphone)

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: It's the second link.  It's there.  It gives the background of us, the aims, the first deliverable. 

   >> But here, if you click here on Dynamic Coalitions. 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: Oh, in the left navigation bar, in the left navigation bar, we're missing? 

   >> Yeah.  I think after you click it, it should come out already. 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: Let's see.  Left navigation bar.  It's taken a while.  Hu!  Okay.  At the IGF Web site, on the tab across the top of it, the Dynamic Coalition is listed and our background.  But if you go to the left bar navigation, we have been dropped.  We do not show up.  Now I know what you mean.  Oh, my gosh! 

   >> Cynthia.  Sorry? 

   >> Yes. 

   >> FLAVIA de PAULA: Yeah, just related to that, to how accessibility is being seen, the importance, with permission, I'm sharing that Fernando has come in not because he's so rude, but he's been trying to find the room.  He went to room 11, as suggested, and there's absolutely no information that the room has been changed.  He went to the information desk.  There's absolutely no information there either. 

   >> (Off microphone)

   >> FLAVIA de PAULA: He went to room 11, yeah. 

   >> (Off microphone)

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: You were not supposed to go on the roof.  It's dangerous for people with visual disabilities.  We could have lost you. 

   >> FERNANDO BOTELHO: Luckily I had someone guiding me.  We went to room 9, room 10, room 11.  We talked to various persons along the way, uniformed persons.  Then we went to the information desk.  We finally had to go to the Secretariat to find out it was here.  So you know.  It took us 30 minutes. 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: I made a one-time announcement during the middle of my workshop, but you would have had to, you know, listen to everything I've said, which not everyone, you know, can because you may be doing something else. 

   I made one announcement.  What we didn't do is ask the IGF Secretariat to fix the -- they were supposed to fix the display, and they were supposed to also kind of ironic to put a sign up on the -- on the roof, but just to tell everybody that there are places -- walking from the stairs to the wooden pathway, there are holes, gaps that you could have stepped into and gotten, you know, severely hurt. 

   >> FERNANDO BOTELHO: Yes, there are a couple ramps made of wood that are pretty scary, just the way they shake when you go up.  It's not terribly inspiring.  But you know, what can I say? 

   >> We are really very sorry about this misunderstanding and for not conveying the information properly.  I suggest we get back to your work.  And do we agree on the approach Gerry proposed?  That is to concentrate on content and the form? 

   And having heard these examples which just happened right now and in the morning as well, so I take back what I said to be indulgent, and we may even use a bit harsher words about the organisers and the UN facilities as well. 

   And probably so the two parts will be like that.  On one hand, we shall have some stronger words about the organisers and the UN facilities.  And the second point would be to include a contact person or contact persons in our work who would help our work. 

   And eventually the third point which will be for the future, to make the future MAG, because the actual MAGs which have been going up till now is an outgoing MAG, so it will be renewed, reselected, it's up to the working group to decide.  So we should call the attention to the future MAG and the future IGF Secretariat to the issues of the accessibility for people with disabilities. 

   >> I also would like to share another story.  The place where we are having lunch is not accessible as well.  So yesterday, Judy -- I want to share her story -- she couldn't have lunch because of the place, because of the dense in the grass, she couldn't go there.  So today there was a private meeting here in another room, and then I went there and I said would it be possible for us to eat here?  Because otherwise, she will -- she won't be able to eat.  And then they asked me to talk to the person who was paying for the private lunch, and then this woman said yes, of course.  So Fernando, myself, and Judy, we had lunch in this other place.  Otherwise, Judy would be without eat. 

   >> FLAVIA de PAULA: One idea for the future is to ask the organiser to appoint the responsible person who is responsible for the accessibility of any kind, and regarding the participation.  So without appointment of a responsible person, it doesn't work. 

   >> Can I suggest to actually appoint two accessible, one on the host country for the organisational aspects, and one in the MAG.  There should be a contact person in the MAG who is responsible for accessibility, and I think we might know who that may be, but

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: I'm sorry.  I think there should be three.  I think there should be a MAG person, I think there should be a person in the host country, and I think there needs to be a Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility person, and then you will get all the content information as to who might be coming, et cetera. 

   >> And it might be wise if that accept that suggestion to also offer up a small, not terribly labour-intensive, but standard approach or methodology for the group to ensure accessibility is evaluated up front, as Gerry Ellis pointed out so well.  And you save everyone a lot of problems. 

   >> FERNANDO BOTELHO: Just two words on that.  I think, you know, that -- I don't know if this is the same, but when everybody is responsible, nobody is responsible.  I think yes, if we need three points of contact, I think maybe one person is the ultimate responsible one and two assistants or two advisors or two whatever.  But I just have to -- it has to be one basically responsible person, otherwise you have three people pointing fingers to everybody else, and it didn't get done. 

   (Connection was lost.  Please stand by for captioning to continue)

    -- but I think because the MAG is more political for general questions, but for the real important thing for me is that we obtain in this moment a person in the local organising committee. 

   >> PETER MAJOR:  I think that we agreed on the main issues, but we shouldn't forget that this is -- also serves as an example what is happening out there in the world, so even if people are participating in the IGF, and even on the lip service level, we have full sympathy and full support while that is the support we have.  And what could expect people who don't really have support?  So basically, if we go back to the original things, and if it's going to be Shadi who is conveying this, and this could be a message that through this examples, it should be made clear to all participants in the IGF that this is a very crucial issue.  And just stressing this point, that if we have some kind of awareness here, the lack of awareness is very tragical outside. 

   >> GERRY ELLIS:  Hey.  We have accepted that we should have a nominated person from the DCAD to speak on our behalf on these issues.  And I wonder should Peter be that person because he is chair of the group, because he is already in Geneva, because he is there already at groups.  Peter, would you think that is a good idea?  Would you see it as a conflict with other duties that you have to perform? 

   >> PETER MAJOR:  Frankly speaking, I don't see it as a conflict.  Having said that, while probably being the chair of the Working Group, I probably shouldn't make very straight statements pro or con.  I would really think Shadi would be an ideal person -- authentic, let me put it that way -- through his experience -- recent experience as what you experienced today, and --

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: We are talking about tomorrow, Gerry.  You are talking about longer term. 

   >> Shadi we have agreed is the speaker for tomorrow, but I mean as the nominated person from this group in the longer term.  

   >> In the longer term, it's perfectly all right. 

   >> Could I ask the group, before you wiggle out of this one, can we agree as a group that tomorrow Shadi will speak for us, but in the longer term, Peter will be that nomination person?  Is that okay with the group? 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: I support that.  I'm so grateful that Peter's in Geneva, that you got excited about accessible Web and kept going.  Thank you.  So I certainly nominate you to represent the DCAD.  That's great.  But I'm concerned now to the point what are the words that we're going to put in Shadi's --

   (Connection was last.  Please stand by for captioning to resume.)


   >> SHADI ABOU-ZAHRA: -- demanding, not asking, but demanding that each host country will have a responsible person for accessibility, where we, as DCAD, are happy to serve as a resource for that person to get information from.  So this way we do not put ourselves as possible for the accessibility, but we serve as a resource, and the spokesperson would be Peter, that they can contact at any time, if they have any questions about accessibility, and Peter will delegate it internally or deal with it as needed. 

   Peter, you've not been nominated; you've been sentenced. 


   So that would be one of, I think, the main points, but each host country needs to have a person who is responsible for accessibility, plus the other points we talked about, about so to say the placement of accessibility.  I'm willing to share a little bit that I've been a very enthusiastic contributor since the WSIS, but that it's been -- continuously been made hard for me to participate, and I think I'm speaking on behalf of many other people with -- with disabilities -- to participate, both physically, but also intellectually. 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: Is it at all -- are you at all comfortable saying something about the need for the access and diversity Plenary to have a panelist representing the disability perspective?  Because we need to have that somehow said gently. 

   >> SHADI ABOU-ZAHRA: No, perfectly happy to. 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: Thank you. 

   >> SHADI ABOU-ZAHRA: Yeah.  Just maybe to replay, so you can give me the feedback, one of the things -- one of the ways I could frame it is to actually say that people with disabilities are part of society, and that we see that accessibility is part of access and diversity and that we need to be at the table if this is to be a truly inclusive process. 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: Such a diplomatic way of putting it.  So thank you, Shadi.  I think my opinion is what you've expressed to me, that you would be comfortable saying I'm very comfortable with -- I think that's a very good statement. 

   >> Sorry.  Fernando. 

   >> FERNANDO BOTELHO: Sorry.  I agree.  I think I like the way you said that, Shadi, very naturally, very simply, very directly.  I think we shouldn't get too caught up in lengthy statements or too much complexity.  Just straight to the point.  Because a lot of people deal with complexity better if they are reading it, but if they are listening to it, it's more difficult for people usually if they are not blind.  Reverse prejudice there.  So yeah, I would go for simplicity and directness as much as possible. 

   >> Yeah, I totally agree with those already mentioned, and I would like to add that to start with what has been well done, and then something could have been better.  Something like that.  It could be very firm and very polite. 

   >> I think it was mentioned that captioning was originally for disabled people, and it has been taken up by the large community, and it is -- in a larger way, it's for inclusiveness.  And probably this is -- if we continue -- if you continue with the statement, probably we should also evaluate our achievements, and this is one of our achievements which contributes to the whole community.  And I would very much like you to -- very much like to ask you to include this achievement and eventually benefits me in a very short way. 

   And finally, I think we should concentrate on the way ahead.  So what should we do?  What we should do. 

   And probably I have already written in one of my emails one of my main concerns is the financial crisis.  And just attending the meeting at the UN, it turns out that my -- my concerns are really justified because when you have a cut in social expenses, this is the first thing.  It's really peanuts.  Let's face it.  It's really nothing -- this is the first thing they try to cut, the Government, the contribution to projects to disabled people and so on and so forth. 

   So probably in the statement, we should touch upon this aspect, that if there are reductions, probably it shouldn't touch disabled people. 

   If we are talking about a way ahead -- and I don't know if really we want to deal with that.  We had in the workshop the new technological developments with these new problems.  We are entering the age of the mobile Internet, mobile telephony, so on and so forth.  So there are new problems which we should be facing, and probably this will really touch even larger community. 

   And finally, which is one of my concerns as well, the aging-related disability, which is becoming a really big problem. 

   So finally, I think the statement we might end with maintaining and raising awareness. 


   >> So just I'm sure I got the point properly, this is separate from what we're talking about, the IGF accessibility?  We are not talking about the case for accessibility, why it's important and why it's important that IGF continues to pursue accessibility as a paramount issue.  Okay.  I absolutely agree. 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: Yeah, we've had a difficult time this meeting.  We want to separate out what Shadi should say that's succinct and appropriate for the Plenary since he's not on the panel, but we also will be developing a statement which will be Shadi will say, Shadi, your statement has to say that we have a DCAD statement that we want to put in the record, and we're noting that now, even though between us all here, we haven't formalized That wording, but we're almost there. 

   >> The people from the next session are already entering. 

   >> PETER MAJOR: Well, to conclude, I think we did agree on the main points for tomorrow's statement, and we agreed on the way ahead.  And I thank you --

   >> SHADI ABOU-ZAHRA: I'll try to draft up just bullet points of those main points again and circulate them by email, and please don't hesitate to slap me softly if I forgot something. 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: Thank you, and I'd like to request the captioner to email the transcript of what you do have for this session to Soria, and if you don't know her email address, you can email it to me.  This is Cynthia.  You know my email address.  And I would like a copy of the transcript of this session as well. 

   >> PETER MAJOR: Just a last word before we break up. 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: I don't know what he is saying.  What did he say? 

   >> Cynthia, will you forward that to all of us? 

   >> CYNTHIA WADDELL: Oh, yeah. 

   >> SHADI ABOU-ZAHRA: I need it as well. 


   >> PETER MAJOR: Just a last word before we break up.  After two sessions this morning, I didn't have a chance to thank Andrea Saks, our coordinator, and Alessandra Gaspari, who was long time performing the Secretariat work on a very high level, and of course (Inaudible) -- who joined us lately, and probably it would be nice to have it in our report.  Thank you. 

   And thank you for your fine contributions.  Thank you.