Thank for the dialogue on our statement.
I tend to agree with Chuck in that WGs are such a key part of the BGC proposals
that it will
look very odd (and unhelpful for the Board) if we say nothing.
I believe the problem may be that I constructed our reply to be REACTIVE to
the BGC
wording.
What I think we have all been saying is more refined than the BGC text.
So I suggest a simple PROACTIVE statement of what we want (and a removal of the
relevant
part of the table under item 3 on working groups).
See attached.
I have also changed to "comment" the title that was previously "partial
support" above the
comments we made.
I hope we can all agee to this latest version. I have done my very best to use
the most
neutral language and capture the minimal level of unanimity we have on Council.
If there is support, Glen please submit. I will be out of the office for the
rest of the day
/ week.
Philip