Attendance: Esmeralda Brown, Felix Dodds, Velda Dhanoolal, Ian Fry, Bremley Lyngdoh, Richard Jordan, and Mita Sen (Northern Clearinghouse)
Regrets: Jan-Gustav Strandenaes, Beatriz Schulthess
Could not connect with: Peace Shalom Mungwashu, and Victoria Elias

Agenda as developed:

1) Matters arising from Minutes of last Management Committee meeting (March 2, 2000)
2) Travel funding for NGOs at CSD-8 & CSD-7
3) Communication with UNESCO
4) Preparations for CSD-9 and Dialogue Sessions for 2001
5) Update from Esmeralda Brown on the Southern Caucus Summit
6) Any other Business

At the last Management Committee meeting, it had been suggested that Felix Dodds and Esmeralda Brown meet with Topfer to discuss the Steering Committee 's relationship with UNEP. Felix reported that the Co-chairs had not been able to do so. Esmeralda pointed out that the issue under discussion was the nature of the Steering Committee's relationship with UNEP. Felix suggested 2 possible ways forward:
1) write a letter to UNEP now, (before the Governing Council), suggesting a meeting between Esmeralda and Topfer- at which it can be discussed whether there should be a relationship between the Steering Committee and UNEP; or
2) Given that UNEP's Governing council will be addressing the issue of relationships between NGOs and UNEP, and there is a paper being drafted on this topic; wait until the paper comes out and then react to it.

Velda Dhanoolal objected to the suggestion that Esmeralda meet with Topfer alone. She stressed that it had been decided that both Co-chairs would meet with UNEP. Felix asked if we should circulate UNEP's civil society paper to the Steering Committee for comments (as and when it is made available). Velda responded that the Management Committee should discuss the paper first, ascertain what relevance it has to the Steering Committee and then discuss it with the Steering Committee as a whole.

Action: It was agreed a Management Committee meeting should be called within 7 days of the release of UNEP's civil society paper.

Education: Esmeralda Brown stated that she felt that she had been misled in terms of what was said about education. Since this related to UNESCO (which was on the agenda as a separate item), she said that she would address the matter under the agenda item 3. Communication with UNESCO.

Esmeralda Brown stated that she was shocked at the way she had been questioned (via email) on the issue of travel funding. She said that every year letters requesting travel funds are sent (by the Southern Caucus) to all governments and UN agencies. In the past 2 years no one has made commitments. In many instances, it was only after the CSD that commitments from governments have come through.

She reported that this year, it was at the eleventh hour that they were informed that the UK government had made a commitment to fund travel for southern NGOs. This money was supposed to have been administered through NGLS, as is customary. However, due to computer problems, NGLS was not able to administer these funds. Given these circumstances, it looked like the monies would be returned to the UK government. At this point the Southern Clearinghouse asked NGLS if they could administer that money, given that they had a long list of requests for travel funding from southern NGOs. This proposal was accepted both by NGLS and the UK government. However, the funds would only be released following the submission of original receipts of all the expenditures. As a result, southern NGOs were forced to borrow the funds for their travel expenditures.

Esmeralda Brown reported that in 1999, SIDA gave a grant that covered travel expenditures for 10 persons. In 2000, the grants from the UK government and SIDA enabled the Southern Caucus to bring 14 NGOs. Esmeralda stated that a report has been sent to the funders, and that the Southern Caucus had received a report. She stated furthermore that a proper report on the funds would be given annually.

Felix Dodds responded that he had no problem with what was said (by Esmeralda Brown). He stated that he had left 3 phone messages at Esmeralda' s office, followed by 6 email messages and 2 faxes- none of which were replied to. He clarified that the problem as he perceived it was not in the context of the specific issue but rather a problem of a lack of communication between the co-chairs.

He agreed that governments should pay up front, stating that it was unfair that NGO representatives should have to use their credit cards for travel expenses, and that is an issue that the Management Committee should raise with the governments.

The points that he made in his email messages related to a particular rule in the guidelines:

"An assembled list for the year will be circulated to ensure transparency and to permit appeals to the Management Committee if necessary."

He reported that he had complaints from the agriculture caucus that they did not know who was being funded from their list. Felix stated that either this rule should be taken out of the Steering Committee guidelines, or we should abide by it. Either a list should be produced each year, which would then be published so that people may appeal or, the rules should be amended.

Esmeralda Brown responded that this year's situation with the agriculture caucus was unprecedented. She pointed out that in the past the Southern Clearinghouse had never had to fund issue caucuses, and that the secretariat was supposed to cover travel funds for the dialogue presenters. In this particular instance, at the last minute they were informed that the monies (from governments) for the travel funding of dialogue presenters had not come through. As a result the funds earmarked for regional representatives ended up covering the travel expenses of dialogue speakers for the agriculture caucus.

Felix reiterated that the rule in the guidelines says that if a priority list existed it should be published so that people can appeal. Esmeralda stated that this year was the first time that UK government funds had been administered though the Southern Clearinghouse; but in general every year they provide a large list to NGLS (of all the requests that they receive). Velda raised a question regarding to whom this list should be circulated. Felix responded that the list in question should be circulated to the Steering committee as a whole.

Velda asked whether the Northern Management Committee was assembling any lists. Felix responded that the Northern Management Committee did not assemble any lists, that if the North was administering any funds then it should adhere to list that the South had agreed to. Velda said that if the assembled list for the year must be circulated to ensure transparency and to permit appeals to the management Committee, then in her view there should be a Northern list and a Southern list. Following further discussion it was proposed to the next Steering Committee meeting that the rule in question be taken out of the Steering Committee guidelines.

Velda proposed that the Management Committee make a recommendation to the Steering Committee that the rule in question be taken out. Bremley and Richard supported this. Ian commented that in principle, it is a good idea to have some level of transparency, so maybe the rule has to be modified so that of there is a southern list that it goes out to the southern members only, if that is the preferred situation, rather than remove the rule as a matter of principle.

 PROPOSAL: Felix suggested an options paper consisting of the following: 1) take out the rule, or 2) circulate a combined list between the North and South, or 3) separate lists: a list assembled by the South circulated to the Southern caucus and a list assembled by the North circulated to the Northern caucus.
Action: To be proposed to the Steering Committee.

Further discussion followed on how travel funds are administered by NGLS; it was suggested that the co-chairs meet with NGLS to discuss the issue. Felix raised another issue related to travel funding, which is that, the rules state "an interim financial report will be produced within 30 days". He said that he personally thought that this was ridiculous, and needed to be changed. Velda suggested replacing "30 days" with "as soon as conveniently possible".

PROPOSAL: Felix suggested a 6-month target, such as the next Intersessional.
Action: To be proposed to the Steering Committee

Felix Dodds clarified that his email stemmed from having found (in Committee Room B) an incomplete letter purporting to be from the Southern Caucus addressed to the UNESCO director, concerning the work of the Education Caucus. His question was whether this letter had been sent. Velda Dhanoolal responded that no letter had been sent.

Esmeralda Brown asked Felix Dodds to report on preparations for CSD-9. Responding to an email sent out by Deling Wang, he stated that he had not done anything on the energy side other than attending a meeting (called by the UK government) with the Canadians in July, where he had read the initial proposal for the energy exhibition and he had pointed out that it was unacceptable to have nuclear as a component to it. Then later in September, while at Bergen, Michael Strauss faxed him letters relating to the energy exhibition and the petition by NGOs against the nuclear, which he then gave to the Canadian government.

Velda asked if the issues raised by Deling's email could be addressed under Any Other Business.

Transport- Felix Dodds reported that the Northern Clearinghouse was assisting the caucus in its outreach.

2002- Felix Dodds reported that the debate on 2002 was going on, that there was a paper by G-77 that had been circulated on the listservers that included many of the comment s that the Steering Committee had made in April, about the involvement of major groups, and other issues. On the venue, they still haven't resolved that the two options were still Indonesia and South Africa. He also reported that the German government was hosting a conference on women and sustainable development in January 2001, and they are going to be producing (along with the women's caucus) a whole set of papers on energy, transport, information for decision-making and international cooperation.

Esmeralda Brown raised a question as to how the southern coordinator of the Transport caucus had been selected. Felix Dodds suggested that she contact the caucus for further clarification on the issue. He went on to say that it was his understanding that Zehra had directly approached the caucus coordinators on energy and transport (Deling, Rajat and Deike). He pointed out that the transport caucus had come out of the habitat process, and the he assumed that they consulted among their networks and chose someone on that basis.

Bremley asked about what was being done on the issue of information technology. He reported that there was an experts group meeting on information technology that was hosted by Environment Canada and the Secretariat in September. Felix Dodds reported that Jan-Gustav had indicated that he and Barbara Gemmill (from ELCI) would be interested in helping to facilitate a group working on information for decision making. Bremley asked whether NGOs would have any booths (at the CSD next year) where they could display their success stories or best practices with regards to information for decision-making. He reported that he had heard of proposal to invite NGOs and private sector to exhibit their best practices. Felix Dodds suggested it would be useful to ask Jan-Gustav and Barbara to present their suggestions on information for decision-making to the next Management Committee meeting.

Action: Jan Gustav and Barbara Gemmill to put forward a proposal to the next Management Committee on an Information for Decision-Making Caucus

Esmeralda Brown reported that the Southern Caucus had decided to hold national and regional consultations, which will culminate in a Summit in August 2001 in Algeria. She said that implementation of Agenda 21 in 2002 and beyond was a major concern for southern NGOs. The Southern Caucus has been working in partnership with the Earth Council, in organizing these consultations.

Velda Dhanoolal listed the consultations that have taken place and those that are currently planned:
Latin America and Caribbean region:
INSNI has already held a consultation, in addition- the Latin American Indigenous Youth had a consultation in August 2000 and are going to have a regional consultation in December 2000. National Network of Panama- November 6, 2000; Southern Diaspora Regional Network 7-9 October, 2000; Trinidad and Tobago have started the process of national consultation; INSNI will hold a consultation in Bermuda at the end of November, 2000; Honduras- Summit of Peoples of African Descent 27-30 November, 2000;
Southern Asia: 17-19 December 2000
Central America:
Costa Rica will have a regional conference in January 2001 2 meetings which they hope to piggy back on- the Earth Council is having a meeting of central American And Caribbean National Networks in Cuba, and South America is having a regional consultation in January 2001.
Future consultations are planned in the Philippines, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Nigeria, North Africa- in Egypt, Barbados, Uganda, and Burkina Faso. The Caribbean region will have a regional consultation in December 2000.

Ian asked if there were any groups in the South Pacific that had expressed an interest in having a regional consultation. Velda Dhanoolal responded that they had tried to get organizations in Fiji to hold a consultation, but this hadn't come through yet.

Velda Dhanoolal raised points from a document sent out by Deling, which raised concerns about the Steering Committee, Management Committee and the Felix Dodds. Richard Jordan noted that he did not have a copy of the email document in question. On the issue of the manner in which Steering Committee meeting are conducted, Velda expressed her personal viewpoint that the Steering Committee should have closed special meetings to discuss their own strategies, and positions among the Steering Committee itself, before going to a wider group. Felix Dodds felt that we needed more time to discuss this issue- and suggested that this be first item on the agenda for the next Management Committee meeting. He went on to say that given that Richard did not have a copy of the message we should put these items on the agenda for the next meeting. Felix pointed out that issues raised such as equal functioning of all caucuses, are important points that require more time for discussion. It was agreed that these items would be added to agenda of the next meeting.

Action: Next Management Committee will deal with: the role and function of the Regional Caucuses and the issue of how to facilitate the equal functioning of all Caucuses

 Felix Dodds addressed issues that raised relating to him, personally. Re: the concerns about the energy exhibition, he said that he had addressed this point earlier in the meeting (under preparations for CSD-9). Relating to meetings with governments, he said that he had sent out an information note last year (following his meetings with governments), and that he would do the same this year. Re: the potential conflict of interest, he pointed out that the Northern Caucus had dealt with the matter quite clearly at the last Steering Committee meeting. He reiterated that he would do a note on his meetings with governments, and expressed his hope that other people would do the same. He said he thought it was useful for people to know what is being said in the corridors as it helps all of us to prepare. He said that his intention would be to send his note only to the Management Committee.

Richard Jordan reported that he had been contacted by Dave Randall who is the head of the Chaplain's Committee for the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics, who is organizing a series of symposia on sustainable development to beheld in Salt Lake city. He would like to present some ideas to the Management Committee for consideration on the Steering Committee participating in these seminars. Richard asked he could distribute a short paper on this issue for the next Management Committee meeting.

Meeting closed