{"id":361,"date":"2010-06-21T03:22:26","date_gmt":"2010-06-21T03:22:26","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rigf.asia\/?page_id=361"},"modified":"2024-01-25T06:49:59","modified_gmt":"2024-01-25T06:49:59","slug":"hong-kong-igf-june-17th-2010-session-1","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/event.rigf.asia\/2010\/hong-kong-igf-june-17th-2010-session-1\/","title":{"rendered":"Hong Kong IGF \u2013 June 17th, 2010: Session 1"},"content":{"rendered":"

Opening Ceremony\/Welcoming Speech, Keynote Opening Session<\/span><\/p>\n

________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n

REAL TIME TRANSCRIPT: Opening Ceremony\/Welcoming Speech,
\n Keynote Opening Session<\/p>\n

Hong Kong IGF
\n 9:45:00-11:00, Thursday 17 June 2010
\n Hong Kong<\/p>\n

DISCLAIMER: Due to the inherent difficulties in capturing a live
\n speaker’s words, it is possible this realtime transcript may
\n contain errors and mistranslations. An edited version of the
\n realtime transcript which amends the inherent errors, will
\n be posted later. LLOYD MICHAUX and APrIGF accept no
\n liability for any event or action resulting from the
\n contents of this transcript.<\/p>\n

________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n

>> : Welcome to the internet news forum. The theme of the
\nforum is building community, realising possibility.<\/p>\n

To hold Asia Pacific is host by APNIC, APTLD,
\nDotAsia Organisation, Freedom House, Hong Kong Council
\nof Social Service, The Hong Kong Federation of Youth
\nGroups, Hong Kong Internet Registration Corporation Ltd,
\nthe Hong Kong Representative of the Multistakeholder
\nAdvisor Group of the IGF, Internet Professional
\nAssociation, Internet Society Hong Kong, NetMission and
\nthe Office of the Honourable Samson Tam, Legislative
\nCouncillor of the information technology functional
\nconstituency.<\/p>\n

Today there is simultaneous interpretation into
\nMandarin, Cantonese, English available for us today.<\/p>\n

Please get the headsets from the counter outside.<\/p>\n

You can see the realtime English transcript on the
\nscreen whenever the session is conducted in English.<\/p>\n

Besides sign language is available beside the stage.<\/p>\n

So now we may start the opening ceremony. I now
\ninvite Mr Stephen Lau, chairman of the organising
\ncommittee, to deliver his welcoming speech.<\/p>\n

>> Stephen Lau: Thank you, Mr Jeremy Godfrey, distinguished
\nrepresentatives of our organising committee, sponsors
\nand supporting organisations, honoured guests, ladies
\nand gentlemen, good morning.<\/p>\n

I believe this is the first time we have an IGF
\nconference in Hong Kong. IGF stands for Internet
\nGovernance Forum.<\/p>\n

I would not want to steal the thunder of my
\ndistinguished colleague, Markus Kummer from the United
\nNations, who later on will provide us with an
\ninstruction to this global UN initiative, nor would
\nI steal the thunder of Mr Jeremy Godfrey, who would talk
\nabout how it came about Hong Kong as organiser and
\norganising this particular conference.<\/p>\n

I just want to devote a minute or so to the word IG,
\ninternet governance.<\/p>\n

The word governance, to me and to most people, if
\nyou go to a conference on governance, it sort of has
\na perception of fairly complex, in fact a dry subject,
\nmaybe even a boring subject, the word governance.<\/p>\n

However, internet and governance together, if I can
\njust mention that, what it actually means, in fact, what
\nI would like to have called it is you and internet.<\/p>\n

Your future, how it is linked to the future of
\ninternet.<\/p>\n

If you look at it from that perspective, you, for
\nexample, when we talk about ourselves, we are either
\ndigital immigrants, meaning that those bone those born
\nin 50s, 60, 70 who have been exposed to internet mid
\ncareer or adulthood or what we call digital natives, the
\n80s and the 90s, who are I would say to paraphrase
\na term, born with a silver spoon in their mouth, when
\nthey have been born with a mobile phone in their hands.<\/p>\n

Why? Because I have been teaching her how to look
\nat photos on this phone.<\/p>\n

You, whether you are digital native, whether you are
\ndigital immigrant, I like you to see these two days as
\na personal journey. Our life has been enriched by the
\ninternet, enriched in the sense that we have ready
\naccess to information, like Google, you can be involved
\nas a consumer or as a business operator, you can expand
\nand interact with your network of friends on the
\nmultimedia purpose through my space, through Facebook,
\nor you could be reflecting your views on a variety of
\nsubjects through being a blogger, a Twitterer or
\nparticipating in chat.<\/p>\n

In this conference, which is about you and the
\ninternet, your personal journey whereby you would see
\nmultiple views, multiple perspectives from
\nmulti-stakeholders, whether it is government, whether it
\nis academic, whether it is civil society, whether it is
\nbusiness, you will get the views on a variety of factors
\nlike I mentioned already and also some of the negative
\nimplications, on a personal basis, it could be privacy
\nrelation, it could be cyber bullying, it could be access
\nto information which might be of an active nature and
\nalso nature, sort of macro issues, like cyber attacks,
\ncyber terrorism or maybe freedom of expression,
\nvis-a-vis sometimes see you mow maybe all or sort of too
\nmuch control by the administration, so it’s a personal
\njourney, I’m sure you are going to have an exciting two
\ndays journey, when you look at all these perspectives
\nand then you find your own positioning in your own
\nbelief.<\/p>\n

So if it’s a personal journey, not only of
\ninformation exposure, it’s a personal journey of self
\ndiscovery, about your expectations, about your
\ndeliberations, about your conviction upon how you look
\nat through the eyes of the internet, your own career,
\nyour life as well.<\/p>\n

With that introductory remark, may I ask, may
\nI invite Mr Jeremy Godfrey, Chief Information Officer in
\nthe HKSAR government, who is also our adviser to the
\norganising committee as well as the patron, to say a few
\nwords to this mattering.<\/p>\n

>> Jeremy Godfrey: Thank you, Stephen, Samson, ladies and
\ngentlemen, good morning.<\/p>\n

Welcome to this event.<\/p>\n

Can I first of thank the organising committee and
\nStephen around the whole committee, Edmon, Charles,
\nother people, Samson, who have done a huge amount of
\nwork to create this event.<\/p>\n

Thank you very much to you as well.<\/p>\n

The origin of this event is that there has been the
\nUN has been running a conference called the IGF, the
\nInternet Governance Forum, for four years now, or five
\nyears.<\/p>\n

That is quite an interesting event, because it’s not
\na kind of normal UN government to government conference.
\nIt really involves all sorts of stakeholders: govs,
\nmembers of on in government organisations, people from
\nthe internet industry and so forth.<\/p>\n

They all come together to talk about these important
\nissues. The internet, of course, is very important in
\nall our lives. We now have globally there are 2 billion
\npeople almost using the internet. In Hong Kong,
\n80 per cent of households are connected to the internet.
\nThe households with children, it’s up into the
\n90 per cent.<\/p>\n

It’s fundamental to all our lives.<\/p>\n

There are many, many issues that affect the
\ninternet. Some of them are kind of technical in nature,
\ncalled the management of critical resources they talk
\nabout, things like domain names and IP addresses.<\/p>\n

Those can be matters of great controversy and
\nexcitement to people.<\/p>\n

There are also issues which are much less technical,
\nissues like how do we get from 80 per cent to
\n100 per cent in or at the conference we had an Asian
\nPacific round table earlier this ek would, there was
\na gentleman from the Bangladesh Parliament here and he
\nwas saying that in Bangladesh, they have about a third,
\nthey have 50 million people, connected to the internet,
\nout of a population of 150 million and the IMPACT that
\nthat can have on Bangladesh’s development, to get more
\npeople connected to the internet is really quite large.<\/p>\n

In Hong Kong, we have announced a campaign or
\na programme to try and get the penetration amongst low
\nincome families, which is already pretty high, towards
\nthe high 80 per cent, almost a little bit under
\n90 per cent, how can we get that even higher? The
\nreason for wanting to get that higher is in education,
\nif you’re a teacher and you have a class of 30 or 40
\nchildren, if you have three or four or 10 children in
\nyour class who are not connected to the internet, then
\nas a teacher, you are going to be very reluctant to base
\nyour the way you deliver teaching and learning around
\nthe use of the internet, very reluctant to incorporate
\nthat into teaching and learning because if you do that,
\nyou will be excluding a small number of people in your
\nclass.<\/p>\n

That means that the people who suffer are not just
\nthe ones without internet access, the people who suffer
\nis everybody in the class.<\/p>\n

That’s why we are both giving some money to help
\npeople, low income families pay for the cost of internet
\naccess and computers, we are also going to set up an
\norganisation to get the price down to enable them to buy
\naccess and computers very cost effectively.<\/p>\n

There is also issues around wise use of the
\ninternet, how can people can safe on the internet, how
\ncan they protect themselves from threats and how do they
\nmake use of this fantastic resource in a positive way.<\/p>\n

Again, we will be working with the Federation of
\nYouth Groups and other NGOs in Hong Kong with
\na significant educational campaign, targeted not just at
\nchildren, but also at parents and at teachers about how
\nto be safe on-line.<\/p>\n

There is also, I think there is an emerging issue
\nsession where we talk about web 2 and the way that
\npeople can use the internet to participate in society
\nmore widely. We are beginning to see the government,
\nfor example, making use of Facebook as a means of public
\nengagement. The most high profile is the Facebook page
\nthat has been set up for the act now campaign, so we
\nhave got the CE making videos and having it posted on
\nFacebook and his office responding, posting news and
\nresponding to comments there. In rather less high
\nprofile ways, we are seeing other government officials
\nbeginning to use these new tools to enhance public
\nengagement. Of course, that is a very early stage and
\nthere probably is many mistakes being made as getting it
\nright, but I think everybody has to live and learn.<\/p>\n

Finally, talk about managing critical resources.<\/p>\n

Of course, we have been working quite hard to make
\nsure that the .hk domain is managed in a way that
\nreflects all the needs of the community. That seems to
\nbe a much calmer organisation now. Of course, it was
\none of the first applicants for a domain name in
\na non-English script. So the application for .HongKong
\nwas I think submitted on the very first day that was
\nopen for applications and it’s going through the process
\nnow and I think Jonathan, some time next year, we think
\nthey should be available and I think the company has
\nannounced that they are going to — anyone with a .hk
\ndomain can get a .Hong Kong domain on a special buy one,
\nget one free offer.<\/p>\n

These issues about the management of the internet
\nare very important to all of us. They are important at
\na global level, but they are also important at a local
\nlevel.<\/p>\n

I think one of the most impressive things about the
\nIGF, which I attended in Egypt in Sharm El Sheikh last
\nyear, was the way in which young people from Egypt were
\ninvolved and the efforts that had been made to reach out
\nto people with disabilities and all sectors of society
\nto participate.<\/p>\n

On the way back, in the airport lounge at the
\nairport, the schedules from flying from Egypt back to
\nHong Kong are not brilliant, a few of us from Hong Kong
\nand actually from a few other Asian jurisdictions, we
\nkind of thought, you know, it would be so good to
\nbroaden the participation in internet governance issues
\nwithin our own communities.<\/p>\n

That was really the genesis of the idea for having
\nthis, is to say that these issues are of importance to
\nall of us and there are some specific local flavours of
\nthose issues that are worth discussing locally, as well
\nas what we might also want to any putting to the global
\ndebate.<\/p>\n

I think I look at the agenda here. It is a pretty
\nfull agenda. So I have probably spoken too long
\nalready, but I think it will be a really good couple of
\ndays.<\/p>\n

Although nobody is going to make any decisions here
\ntoday, what I think I hope will happen is that we will
\nall go away, whether we are from government, from civil
\nsociety, from the internet industry, with a better
\nunderstanding of the perspectives of the other
\nstakeholder groups, so that when we do participate in
\ndecision-making forums, we are all able to make better
\ninformed decisions and decisions that reflect a better
\nunderstanding of the needs of the entire community.<\/p>\n

That’s my wish for today. I’m sure that you will
\nall fulfil it and I wish everyone a happy conference and
\nproductive conference.<\/p>\n

Thank you very much.<\/p>\n

>> : We ask Mr Jeremy Godfrey to stay on stage and provide
\nthe thank yous to our sponsor.<\/p>\n

First I invite representative from Microsoft, Mr
\nJohn Galligan, to come up on stage.<\/p>\n

May I now invite the representative from APNIC, Ms
\nSamantha Dickinson, to come up on stage and receive the
\nthank you plaque.<\/p>\n

May I now invite the representative from Cyberport,
\nMr Herman Lam, to come on stage and receive the thank
\nyou plaque.<\/p>\n

May I now invite the representative from HKIRC,
\nMr Jonathan Shea, to come on stage and receive the thank
\nyou plaque.<\/p>\n

May I now invite our community sponsor, the
\nrepresentative from APTLD, Mr Keith Davidson, to come on
\nstage.<\/p>\n

I would also like to acknowledge IMPACT, one of our
\ncompany sponsors for the contribution to the APRIGF.<\/p>\n

May I invite the representative from JPRS to come on
\nstage and receive the thank you plaque, please.<\/p>\n

May I now invite the representative from SIRC to
\ncome on stage and receive the thank you plaque, please.<\/p>\n

May I now invite Mr Stephen Lau to to present the
\nthank you plaque to Mr Jeremy Godfrey.<\/p>\n

All sponsors will have a group photo now.<\/p>\n

May I invite representative from organising
\ncommittee to stand in front of podium and take a group
\nphoto with our sponsor, including Samson Tam,
\nLegislative Council member. Edmon Chung, Mr John Fung,
\ndirector of ITRC HKC, Mr Ken Ang, The Hong Kong
\nFederation of Youth Groups, Mr Alex Ho, Mr Charles Mok,
\nand Ms Elaine Chang from NetMission.<\/p>\n

Thank you to our sponsors.<\/p>\n

Please be seated.<\/p>\n

This is the and of our opening ceremony.<\/p>\n

We shall now start the key note section. May I now
\ninvite Mr Stephen Lau, the session chairman, to start
\nthe session for us.<\/p>\n

Thank you. I would like to introduce Mr Markus
\nKummer, the executive co-ordinator for the secretariat
\nof IGF for United Nations. Mr Kummer has
\na distinguished career as a diplomat in the Swiss
\nForeign Ministry, having held a number of senior
\npositions across Europe.<\/p>\n

Prior to his current position, he was very much
\ninvolved in all the pre inter-governmental pre
\ndiscussions and working groups with regard to internet
\nissues which led to the formation of IGF, which is now,
\nas I said, the executive co-ordinator for the
\nsecretariat.<\/p>\n

Mr Kummer is a well-known figure on the global scene
\nand he will talk, give us some background on IGF, its
\norigin, its current status and what IGF to the world at
\nlarge.<\/p>\n

>> Markus Kummer: Good morning, thank you, Stephen, for the
\nintroduction. It is a great pleasure for me to be here.<\/p>\n

As you can imagine, you heard that I’m a Swiss
\ncitizen and I found it difficult to find sleep last
\nnight after the exciting victory of Switzerland.<\/p>\n

I will try and give some background and context on
\nthe IGF, how it fits in in global discussions, where we
\ncome from and where we are heading for.<\/p>\n

To start with, a few words on the internet, as both
\nspeakers before me have pointed out.<\/p>\n

The internet creates unprecedented opportunity, but
\nat the same time, also challenges on a global scale.<\/p>\n

The internet has no borders and the world is based
\non borders, the world, as we know it, as it is. This
\nleads to a natural tension between systems.<\/p>\n

Whenever we have global problems, there are calls
\nfor global solutions. The UN is normally the place to
\nfind global solutions, such as on climate change.<\/p>\n

So there are many who think there should be a global
\nsolution for the internet.<\/p>\n

However, governments sometimes can jump to
\nconclusions and take their own decisions. This has
\nhappened at the national level in some cases where there
\nhas been an outcry within the respective countries that
\nthe decisions taken were not the right ones.<\/p>\n

My take on that would be that it’s better to live
\nwith a problem, rather than finding the wrong solution.<\/p>\n

Wrong solution on a global scale could actually
\nstifle the further development, deployment of the
\ninternet.<\/p>\n

What matters to users is to have a reliable, stable
\ntool, is to have no political interference and to have
\na stable and predictable regulatory environment.<\/p>\n

Having said that, it is obvious that many
\ngovernments are not happy with the way the internet is
\nrun. They rely on the internet net by now as a backbone
\nof global infrastructure and they would like to feel in
\ncharge, as they are normally.<\/p>\n

New model of internet governance, others favour
\na more evolutionary approach.<\/p>\n

There are different views on government involvement,
\nbut it is clear by now that the stronger government
\ninvolvement seems inevitable.<\/p>\n

One of the confusions with internet governance
\nrelated to the actual word “governance”. What does it
\nmean?<\/p>\n

There was a strong resistance when the word first
\nemerged in the global discussions. There were those who
\nthought governance was supposed to mean government, but
\nthis is not the case.<\/p>\n

Governance is an abstract concept and is not
\nnecessarily limited to government activities.<\/p>\n

Looking back now at the history, the term first
\nemerged back in 2003 during the negotiations on the
\nfirst phase of the world summit on Information Society,
\nwhen the summit began to talk about the internet.<\/p>\n

It was a recognition of the importance of the
\ninternet.<\/p>\n

The discussions revealed that there were a clash
\nbetween two schools of thought, between two systems, as
\nI said initially.<\/p>\n

On the one hand, the internet community, the private
\nsector, those who actually run the internet and on the
\nother hand, many governments.<\/p>\n

These are basically two visions of the world that
\nare not compatible on the one hand, the internet vision
\nnetworks, of a collaborative effort, of bottom up
\ndistributed cooperation versus the governmental
\ncorporation, where governments sit on top of the
\npyramid, where governments are in charge and the others,
\nas Jeremy pointed out in his remarks, the others are
\nsometimes led into the room, but if they are let into
\nthe room, they are told to sit at the back and they
\ndon’t have necessarily the right to speak or they only
\nhave the right to speak when they are given a slot,
\nusually at the end of the session.<\/p>\n

This is what happened during WSIS, governments
\nfinally negotiated the final text, all the others were
\nlocked out of the room.<\/p>\n

Between 2003 and 2005, there was a process, there
\nwas an inter-governmental working group on internet —
\nthere was a working group on internet governance set up
\nby the secretary general to find ways to move forward.<\/p>\n

I had the honour to be the secretary of that working
\ngroup and the working group made recommendations and to
\na large extent, they were endorsed by the summit, the
\nsecond phase of the summit, which took place in tu nis
\nin 2005.<\/p>\n

The Tunis agenda was the outcome document of Tunis.
\nIt did not make any major changes. It recognised that
\nthe existing arrangements have worked effectively, but
\nalso noted that there is room for improvement, like any
\nhuman endeavour, there is always room for improvement.<\/p>\n

In Tunis heads of state and government took a two
\npronged decision. On the one hand, they invited the
\nsecretary general of the UN to convene a new forum for
\nmulti-stakeholder policy dialogue, the Internet
\nGovernance Forum, and on the other hand, it recognised
\nthe need for enhanced cooperation to enable governments
\non an equal footing to carry out their roles and
\nresponsibilities.<\/p>\n

Internet governance was defined by the Tunis agenda.
\nThe Tunis agenda adopted a broad definition of internet
\ngovernance that goes beyond naming and addressing the
\nphysical infrastructure of the internet.<\/p>\n

It identified a broad range of public policy issues,
\npart of internet governance and it proposed further
\ninternationalisation of internet governance
\narrangements.<\/p>\n

Very important aspect was that the recognition of
\nthe various stakeholder groups, of the academic and
\ntechnical communities as a new stakeholder group, and it
\nrecognised also the importance of multi-stakeholder
\napproach at all levels, national, regional, global, and
\nit recognised the role of the private sector and the
\ncivil society as a driver of innovation in the
\ndevelopment of the internet.<\/p>\n

Among the policy issues it identified some
\npriorities, such as strengthening the trust framework
\nand security, cyber crime, spam, freedom of information,
\nconsumer protection, data protection, privacy,
\nmultilingualisation of the internet and local content
\ndevelopment.<\/p>\n

WSIS also adopted principles. The management of the
\ninternet should be multilateral, transparent and
\ndemocratic.<\/p>\n

These are all very nice words. Nobody can be
\nagainst it.<\/p>\n

However, it’s not that clear what they do mean.<\/p>\n

Some of them are mutually exclusive, multilateral,
\nfor instance, in a traditional UN language, means
\ntraditional UN setting, where governments deal with each
\nother in an inter-governmental organisation.<\/p>\n

If you have a multi-stakeholder setting, that does
\nnot fit into this traditional setting.<\/p>\n

What does it mean, the WSIS principle? Is it
\ntraditional inter-governmental cooperation or is it
\nbottom-up multi-stakeholder cooperation?<\/p>\n

After Tunis, I like this quote. The economist said:<\/p>\n

“It is a piece of sort. No one controls the
\ninternet, but many are determined to try.”<\/p>\n

As a preliminary synthesis after Tunis, the
\ndiscussions are going on, but multi-stakeholder
\ncooperation has been firmly established now.<\/p>\n

The roles of the different stakeholders, it has also
\nbeen made clear that they have respective roles, they
\ndon’t all have the same role. They have different
\nroles.<\/p>\n

Governments remain the decision makers. However,
\nthese decisions need to be based on a solid
\nunderstanding of the issues. There is a need for
\ndialogue between private sector, civil society, the
\ntechnical community and governments.<\/p>\n

Governments need to tell them what they are worried
\nabout and the other stakeholders need to advise
\ngovernments on the feasibility and on the consequences
\nof envisaged solutions.<\/p>\n

Now to the IGF more in detail. It has, by now, been
\nrecognised that it’s one of the major outcomes of WSIS
\nand in so far, it has proved successful. But what is
\nthe IGF? It is sometimes easier to define what it is
\nnot.<\/p>\n

It’s not a UN conference. It’s not a new
\norganisation. It’s not a decision-making body. It has
\nno defined membership. Anybody with proven expertise
\nand interest can participate.<\/p>\n

In essence, the IGF is a platform to discuss public
\npolicy issues related to the internet.<\/p>\n

It provides a space for a structured dialogue on
\nthese issues. It provides a platform for sharing best
\npractices at all levels.<\/p>\n

It provides also a neutral meeting place for all
\nrelated institutions, inter-governmental organisations
\nand the internet institutions.<\/p>\n

For those who attended the Asian Pacific regional
\nmeeting we had yesterday, the chairman of the board of
\nICANN on the panel, Peter Dengate Thrush, and he said
\nthat he had found a better relationship with the
\nInternational Telecommunication Union, a classical
\ninter-governmental organisation. Thanks to the IGF,
\nwhere he could meet on a neutral ground, in that sense,
\nthe IGF provides a non-threatening environment. You
\ndon’t have to go to the other. You can meet in
\na neutral ground where everybody goes.<\/p>\n

In this sense, the IGF helps build thrust and
\nconfidence among all internet users.<\/p>\n

Its methodology is not based on the classical method
\nof UN meetings, where usually people sit down and
\nnegotiate on a text.<\/p>\n

It is based on the exchange of information on the
\nsharing of best practices, the not to also is: think
\nglobally, act locally.<\/p>\n

There is no one size fits all solution that has been
\nrepeatedly recognised that one solution may work in one
\nenvironment, but not in another.<\/p>\n

They have to be adapted to the needs of each
\ncountry, of each region.<\/p>\n

The internet is a shared environment, sharing
\nexperiences and best practices seems the methodology for
\nthat environment.<\/p>\n

What the IGF does is what I like to call is based on
\na soft governance approach.<\/p>\n

It is based on the convening power of the UN, when
\nthe UN extends an invitation, people usually go to
\nattend a meeting.<\/p>\n

However, it has no power of redistribution, it only
\nhas the power of recognition. It can identify issues of
\nconcern, it can draw attention to an issue, can put an
\nissue on the agenda of international cooperation.<\/p>\n

One example we discussed also during the past two
\ndays and came up today is the introduction of the
\ninternationalised domain names. The IGF did not take
\nany decision in this matter, but it is generally
\nrecognised that the IGF helped accelerate this process.<\/p>\n

This strange animal the IGF is has led to different
\nexpectations and there remain divergent views on the
\nstrengths and weaknesses.<\/p>\n

Some see this lack of decision-making power as
\na weakness and they would like the IGF to produce more
\nconcrete results.<\/p>\n

Others, on the contrary, see this apparent weakness
\nas a strength.<\/p>\n

This lack of decision-making power creates space for
\nan open dialogue, where people can discuss without
\nhaving to fear unintended consequences.<\/p>\n

When you’re in a negotiating context, you don’t
\nreally discuss, you fight, you fight over words.<\/p>\n

I vividly recall discussions in the WSIS where we
\ndidn’t go into substance, it was just stating positions.<\/p>\n

For instance, there was a big debate on open or
\nproprietary software, but there was no informed
\ndiscussion on the merits of each software.<\/p>\n

You can hold views, that this is better or that is
\nbetter, but in WSIS, there was no real exchange of views
\nor opinions. There was, at the end, the adopted text,
\nwhich said:<\/p>\n

“Open source software is good. Proprietary software
\nis good.”<\/p>\n

But it did not provide any guidance, what is better
\nfor what use.<\/p>\n

In the IGF, we had discussions on this issue related
\nto security.<\/p>\n

I’m not saying we drew any conclusions, but at least
\nwe had an informed exchange of views. Some said open
\nsource software is better for security, because you can
\ncontrol it.<\/p>\n

Others made the point no, proprietary software is
\nbetter, because you don’t have any use in a big
\ncorporation or in a government, who may not be that
\nsavvy, making big mistakes and both points were valid.<\/p>\n

There are pros and cons to each side.<\/p>\n

This is basically the IGF approach, that we look at
\neach issue from all the aspects and the past experience
\nhas shown, there is usually no simple answer to any of
\nthese issues.<\/p>\n

Again, to the regional meeting we had two days ago,
\nthe past two days and now more the local meeting, in
\nWSIS, in the global discussions, there is much talk
\nabout the global issues.<\/p>\n

However, there is an increasing recognition that
\nnational and regional policies are important.<\/p>\n

As somebody said, good internet governance begins at
\nhome.<\/p>\n

The enabling environment for instance, is a key
\nfactor to allow for the development and deployment of
\nthe internet. This is very much a local issue.<\/p>\n

Policy cohesion, policy coherence at all levels,
\nthey are two ways of envisaging it. There is a top down
\nway, a classical way of negotiating a treaty, but there
\nis also a bottom up way of following, of adopting the
\nright policy. If every country, if every region, if
\nevery jurisdiction adopts the right policy, then we also
\nget there and maybe quicker than by trying to find
\nglobal solutions.<\/p>\n

The national and regional IGF initiatives, they were
\nnot part of the negotiated outcome. WSIS in Tunis
\nrecognised the importance of national and regional
\npolicy coherence, but they did not say much about it.<\/p>\n

It did not say how this should be achieved.<\/p>\n

It is interesting to see that after the first two
\nIGF meetings, it began to appear, first in the Latin
\nAmerican and Caribbean region and in East and West
\nAfrica, in Europe, there is a Commonwealth IGF
\ninitiative, now also Asian Pacific and then there are
\nmany initiatives at the national level, from the United
\nKingdom to the US to Italy, Denmark, Spain, the latest
\none was in the Russian Federation.<\/p>\n

These are basically very spontaneous initiatives,
\nsuch as this meeting here, very much in a bottom-up way.<\/p>\n

There is no common template. All of them, the only
\nthing they have in common is that they are based on
\na multi-stakeholder approach.<\/p>\n

We have had four meetings so far, in Athens 2006,
\nRio 2007, Hyderabad India 2008, Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt,
\nin 2009 and now we are preparing the fifth meeting,
\nwhich will take place in Vilnius, Lithuania, on 14 to
\n17 September this year.<\/p>\n

We have built our meetings on the same core themes
\nand priorities since Athens, access and diversity,
\nsecurity, privacy, openness, critical internet
\nresources, with development and capacity building as
\ncross cutting priorities.<\/p>\n

What we have improved in Athens, we dealt with each
\nof the issues separately and in Hyderabad, the third
\nmeeting, we began to group some of the issues that
\nbelonged together. We have grouped them together, such
\nas security and openness.<\/p>\n

Now we cannot imagine any more that you can talk
\nabout security without talking about openness and
\nprivacy and you cannot talk about openness without
\ntalking about security.<\/p>\n

These issues are very much interlinked.<\/p>\n

In Vilnius, the overall theme for the meeting will
\nbe IGF 2010, developing the future together.<\/p>\n

The agenda more in detail is managing critical
\ninternet resources, where we look at the plumbing, the
\ndomain name system, the internet protocol address
\nallocation.<\/p>\n

We have security, openness and privacy. We have
\naccess and diversity. These are the other twin issues.<\/p>\n

You can only have access if you respect diversity
\nand I see with pleasure, that here you provide
\nfacilities for those hard of hearing, we have sign
\nlanguage.<\/p>\n

This is a very important issue, as the internet
\nprovides unprecedented opportunities for people with
\ndisabilities.<\/p>\n

We have, for the first time, internet governance for
\ndevelopment and here have to open a parenthesis.
\nI noticed that there is a great interest here to discuss
\nwhat we call, in the jargon, in the WSIS jargon, ICT for
\ndevelopment. That is more issues related to the
\ndevelopment aspect.<\/p>\n

Here we try to be narrower in scope and really talk
\nabout internet governance issues, how does it relate to
\ndevelopment, without going into the broader societal
\ndevelopment agenda.<\/p>\n

Under the traditional emerging issues heading, we
\nwill look this time at cloud computing and in the
\nprevious years, we always had a taking stock session,
\nwhich looked inside at how the IGF worked. This year,
\nwe will take stock of the broad internet governance
\nlandscape to see what has changed since Athens.<\/p>\n

Change has been momentous. In Athens, we talked
\nabout, commended ourselves that there was 1 billion
\npeople on-line, but we said what happens to the other
\n5 billion? By now, we have 2 billion people on-line,
\nwhich is a tremendous change and then, of course, all
\nthe other changes that happened at the application end
\nof the internet.<\/p>\n

The original mandate of the IGF was for five years,
\nsubject to review.<\/p>\n

The secretary general of the United Nations was
\nrequested to hold formal consultations with IGF
\nparticipants on the desirability of a continuation of
\nthe forum. These consultations took place in Sharm El
\nSheikh last year.<\/p>\n

Based on this, the secretary general recommended to
\nextend the mandate for another five years.<\/p>\n

The decision will be taken by the General Assembly
\nof the United Nations in December this year.<\/p>\n

This is, in a way, the inherent paradox, the IGF was
\nthe result of inter-governmental deliberation,
\ngovernments made a very, I would say, courageous
\ndecision in opening the doors to all the stakeholders,
\nbut at the same time, this open forum is not allowed to
\ndecide by itself.<\/p>\n

Governments retain the decision-making power and in
\nthe decision-making process, again, the other
\nstakeholders will be excluded.<\/p>\n

However, the other stakeholders are encouraged to
\nconnect with their respective governments to make sure
\nthat their views come across in the final decision.<\/p>\n

These final decisions ultimately will also be
\na decision on whether or not the multi-stakeholder
\napproach is the best approach towards internet
\ngovernance and also on whether or not to continue with
\na soft governance model such as the IGF.<\/p>\n

With this, I thank you for your attention. I wish
\nyou excellent deliberations for the next two days.<\/p>\n

Thank you.<\/p>\n

>> : Thank you, Mr Kummer.<\/p>\n

Now may I invite Mr John Galligan, Director of
\nInternet Policy from Microsoft Asian Pacific, to deliver
\nhis key note speech.<\/p>\n

>> Stephen Lau: John, may I , on behalf of the conference,
\nintroduce Mr John Galligan.<\/p>\n

John is the regional director for internet policy
\nfor Microsoft. His role is support markets across Asian
\nPacific, to promote Microsoft internet policy agenda,
\nincluding privacy, security, cloud computing and the
\non-line ecosystem.<\/p>\n

Apart from having held a number of senior positions
\nin the private sector, he has also occupied a number of
\nsenior advisory positions in Australian federal
\npolitics.<\/p>\n

I’m very impressed with the title of his
\npresentation, because it denotes the congruence of two
\nimportant facets in contemporary internet usage.<\/p>\n

One is cloud computing, which provides a new channel
\nand efficiency and productivity for users and for
\nbusiness services alike, providers alike.<\/p>\n

Secondly, it’s trust.<\/p>\n

Without trust, without integrity, whether it be data
\nor service, then we don’t have the internet will not be
\nable to be effectively grow.<\/p>\n

With the presentation title of Trust and Cloud
\nComputing, New Opportunities and New Responsibilities,
\nmay I present Mr John Galligan.<\/p>\n

>> John Galligan: I’m going to have to definitely
\nmulti-task. I’m meant to point over here, look at my
\nslides over here and talk over here. I’ll try to do at
\nleast two of those well, so please bear with me if I’m
\na little bit shortcoming of one of those.<\/p>\n

Thank you for the opportunity to be here and
\ncertainly the opportunity to support what is an
\nincredible dialogue.<\/p>\n

I’m very inspired by what I have seen through my
\ntravels through Asia. In Australia, we like to think of
\nourselves as Asia, but now living six months in
\nSingapore, you realise just how different this part of
\nthe world really is from I suppose the lower part of the
\nregion.<\/p>\n

Spending the last week or so here in Hong Kong and
\nin mainland China, you really feel like you’re at the
\nengine room of the global economy.<\/p>\n

But more importantly, you’re the foundry of much of
\nthe innovation that the rest of the world is going to
\nenjoy.<\/p>\n

When you think about the internet, and in many ways,
\nwhat cloud computing is going to create from the
\ninternet, investment that has been done through the
\nregion, I think we are again in an incredible part of
\nthe world, to see the real benefits that come from this.<\/p>\n

But I did start my presentation with a title, new
\nopportunities and new responsibilities, but I thought
\nalso too I would throw in new environment as well,
\nbecause I think the technology industry has a tendency
\nto believe its own press releases, but it tends to not
\nbring people along with the dialogue very quickly and
\nstarts introducing new terminologies and new ideas,
\nwithout really explaining them a little bit.<\/p>\n

So I thought I would spend the first couple of
\nminutes talking a little bit about cloud computing and
\nmaybe doing a bit of level set of what we think of cloud
\ncomputing and hopefully they get an understanding from
\nyou as well.<\/p>\n

I should say that I had a little more sleep last
\nnight than Markus, because the Australian team, if you
\nhave been following, hasn’t been doing as well as
\nothers, so I’m getting a lot more sleep over the World
\nCup over the next couple of days as well. If I look
\na bit bright eyed and bushy tailed, it’s because I got
\nplenty of sleep last night.<\/p>\n

In our company, we are talking about the cloud being
\nthe fifth generation of computing. I’m not going to go
\ninto great detail of the steps there.<\/p>\n

But I think everyone can understand that we are
\nprobably at that pivot point, where technology is really
\ngoing to get the dividends from a lot of the investment,
\na lot of the innovation that we have seen over the last,
\nsay, 30 years.<\/p>\n

We have moved from the mainframe environment.
\nMainframe is still a part of much of the infrastructure
\nthat we enjoy within corporations and government, and
\nthey really are going to run the back ends of the
\ninternet cloud. We have gone from the client server to
\nthe web to SOA and the cloud is delivering against the
\nexpectations that we have all developed over the last 10
\nor so years around the internet. The opportunity to
\nreally download applications, the opportunity to use our
\nweb enabled devices, in a way which is seamless.
\nStephen opened the discussion talking about digital
\nnatives and digital immigrants and there is a generation
\nwho will never know what it’s like not to have a web
\nenabled device.<\/p>\n

As the industry come together to meet that
\nexpectation, it’s very important for us to think about
\nthe responsibilities on us as developers and as industry
\nparticipants, but also what is the public policy
\nenvironment that is going to ensure that those
\nexpectations are met.<\/p>\n

Markus talked about the cohesion issues of public
\npolicy.<\/p>\n

We are seeing the cohesion between the opportunity
\nand the responsibilities very discerningly, so the
\nopportunity for us to really think about the way in
\nwhich we are going to deliver our internet strategy and
\nservices in a way which is meaningful and responsible is
\nvery important to Microsoft, but I also know it’s very
\nimportant to participants with the IGF as well.<\/p>\n

Again, we are seeing the extension of the platform.<\/p>\n

>From the client based PC, that I can see many people
\nusing here in the room today, to the servers which sit
\nin many ways behind the infrastructure that we take for
\ngranted, through to the mobile devices.<\/p>\n

Asia is clearly one of those markets where you are
\nseeing the up surge in mobile devices really driving the
\napplication and the ecosystem around that, through to
\nthe last thing which is the cloud.<\/p>\n

Again, I would like probably to ask the question of
\nhow many people understand the terminology, the cloud,
\nhere.<\/p>\n

We have a few.<\/p>\n

I suppose I have to ask the question, how many
\npeople have a hotmail address or a gmail address or use
\nYahoo mail or Facebook?<\/p>\n

Essentially, you are all participants in cloud
\ncomputing. Because as my CEO says, what used to be on
\na server is now a service. That is essentially probably
\nthe most pithy way we can describe the cloud. It is
\nessentially using your device, phone, PC, division, the
\nLG refrigerators are cloud enabled.<\/p>\n

So it’s basically using whatever device you choose
\nto deliver a service that you want, anywhere, any
\ndevice, any time.<\/p>\n

In some ways, the fact that we are a bit ignorant of
\nthe fact that we are using cloud is not surprising,
\nbecause again the technology industry probably hasn’t
\nbeen as good as describing exactly what cloud computing
\nis all about.<\/p>\n

We have come a long way. I have been with the
\norganisation a little over four years and if someone
\nasked me what cloud computing was to me, it was opening
\nmy laptop in a plane, doing my email between gates,
\nprobably between visits, but now we really do understand
\nthat it is in many ways moving to that descriptive
\ncomputing environment that we all take for granted.<\/p>\n

Microsoft commissioned a survey earlier this year to
\nreally better understand within the American context
\nwhat people understood the cloud services to be.<\/p>\n

First of all, 76 per cent had never heard of it.<\/p>\n

But 84 per cent of people use some sort of web mail,
\nso they were stakeholders in the cloud.<\/p>\n

57 per cent use social media sites and I think that
\nprobably that is undersells in many ways the social
\nnetworking platforms that are out there. I think the
\nnumber is a bit soft. 33 per cent of people store their
\nphotos on-line.<\/p>\n

I’m sure probably in an IT literate environment like
\nthis, those numbers are going to be higher, certainly in
\nterms of the use that we are working in storing your
\ndata and storing your memories.<\/p>\n

When we ask people and explained what cloud was,
\n58 per cent of consumers and 86 per cent of businesses
\nare excited about what they see around cloud computing
\nand more importantly, they do see the opportunity for
\ngovernment to really enable services and to deliver
\nopportunities to citizens in a better way through the
\ncloud.<\/p>\n

We are seeing a driven it both ends, in terms of con
\nup so errs wanting that access and that information and
\ntheir services being delivered seamlessly.<\/p>\n

But in this area of os territory and this area where
\ngovernment is biggest stakeholdr in the economy and
\nbiggest stakeholder in the terms of our lives, they are
\nwanted governments to use technology better, to deliver
\nagainst the services that they take for granted, be it
\neducation, be it healthcare, be it national security or
\nnational safety.<\/p>\n

It’s not surprising that we are seeing the data
\nbeing looked at in a different way.<\/p>\n

We think about data probably being the new currency
\nof the digital economy.<\/p>\n

With that currency comes value.<\/p>\n

Value to individuals, maintaining their privacy,
\nmaintaining the integrity of their information, to
\ncriminals and bad actors who potentially want to use
\nthat information, to organisations who are servicing the
\nglobal internet economy through advertising or any other
\nrevenue sources, making sure that they are also being
\nable to use that information value bring to serve as
\ntheir businesses as well.<\/p>\n

So the challenge for industry and the challenge for
\ngovernments and policy makers across the board, is how
\ndo we protect and secure that information, that very
\nvaluable currency at the same time as driving adoption.<\/p>\n

This very complex information ecosystem is now
\nhaving to co-exist in very different social, regulatory,
\neconomic and geopolitical contexts.<\/p>\n

I’m not going to go into specific details, but the
\nlast six months alone have shown just how complex the
\nmanagement of data, the management of information,
\nwithin those contexts, really are. I think we are going
\nto see the debates go on for some time. In Hong Kong
\nand this region is certainly, I suppose, in many ways,
\nat the centre of some of those debates.<\/p>\n

The role that the Internet Governance Forum can
\nreally help to drive some clarity around that is very
\nimportant, so we look forward to the role of the IGF can
\nplay around that.<\/p>\n

We also have the challenge that many of the policies
\nand regulations that are governing the internet,
\ngoverning the cloud, were built for a complete I’ll
\ndifferent computing environment. In many ways, they
\nwere designed before even computers and technology were
\nso pervasive. We have digital issues operating in an
\nanalog policy environment.<\/p>\n

Because the internet is really enabled the flow of
\ninformation to be less linear, to be less from A to B,
\nto be more atomic, to be more augmented, more disbursed,
\nchanged and facilitated in a different way, we are
\nseeing that policymakers are going to be challenged at
\nhow to deal with their local responsibilities in an
\nincreasingly global flow of information and that
\ninformation isn’t just flowing from one country to
\nanother or from one stakeholder to another. It is
\nmultiple stakeholders within that delivery of that
\ninformation pathway.<\/p>\n

For policymakers, and for also for consumers, we
\nneed to think about what does local mean today, for
\ninstance, where the the customer located, where is the
\ndata stored? Who owns it and who can get access to it?<\/p>\n

We are seeing complex discussions within government,
\nwe are seeing complex discussions within industry,
\nacross all these pillars.<\/p>\n

Who has law enforcement has opportunities and also,
\ntoo obligations to protect I suppose the national
\nsecurity of a country.<\/p>\n

But also what is the responsibility of a data hoster
\nto make sure that data is protected and maintained in
\na way which is integral to the service they are
\nproviding to an individual.<\/p>\n

We are challenged too about what local means for us,
\nwhat are our local responsibilities to law enforcement
\nor to governments in one market where we may host data,
\nthere I to the customer maybe who may be sitting
\nsomewhere else and terms and conditions didn’t expect us
\nor any other provider to be so liberal to the access to
\nthat information.<\/p>\n

In summary, governments really need to balance
\nopportunities and responsibility. We are not saying to
\nput a moat around the cloud, if that’s possible, to box
\nit in, to think about security and privacy to such
\na point where it stops the innovation, it stops the
\nvelocity that we are enjoying through the development of
\nthis new technology.<\/p>\n

But equally, too, that there is an amazing level of
\nresponsibility that comes, both with technology to
\nindustry, but also to the governments, to make sure that
\nwe are enabling the opportunities that are so evident
\nfrom the delivery of services by the internet and the
\ncloud, but also to make sure that we are doing so
\nresponsibly.<\/p>\n

Some of the core policy issues that we are seeing
\nmanifest itself around the cloud, around the internet,
\nare nothing new, but again they are magnified by that
\nincredibly complex ecosystem of information that we are
\ntalking about.<\/p>\n

The first one is infrastructure and access. I’m
\ngoing to come into these in a little more detail in
\na moment.<\/p>\n

That is making sure that people get access to the
\ncloud and access to the internet and on Tuesday, there
\nwas a digital inclusion workshop that talked about
\nobviously a lot of the issues that come to what does the
\ndigital divide mean to people who don’t have access to
\ntechnology.<\/p>\n

Increasingly, the digital divide is going to be
\nthose who have access to broadband and high-speed access
\nto the internet security and cyber crime, Markus
\nmentioned quite clearly that those are going to be
\nincreasing issues for policymakers and IGF in terms that
\nwe govern the risks around cyber crime and security.<\/p>\n

Privacy is a common partner, almost inextricably
\nlinked to security these days.<\/p>\n

Because people’s heightened sense of what privacy
\nmeans to them is becoming more and more manifest, as the
\nissues start to play out themselves in the media, and in
\nthe technology environment.<\/p>\n

We just have to see some of the social networking
\nsights around the world these days who are challenged by
\nthe opportunities to build a business environment for
\nthemselves, but also to potentially protect the privacy
\nof their users. That issue is going to occur for quite
\nsome time.<\/p>\n

We are seeing traditional issues, like intellectual
\nproperty protection. If information is put up on the
\nweb, on the cloud, how can it be maintained, how can the
\nintegrity of that innovation and that intellectual
\nproperty be maintained? Accessibility, not just in
\naccessibility to technology, but how you can use
\ntechnology in a way which is meaningful to people who
\nhave assisted technology needs. The disabled, the
\ninfirmed, seniors, for instance, as services by
\ngovernment, as services by corporations become
\nincreasingly web enabled, we don’t want to see a divide
\ncreated by people who can’t use services because they
\nare web enabled now and don’t respect the department
\nneeds of people within the community.<\/p>\n

Finally, in this part of the world, again, free
\nexpression.<\/p>\n

I’m not going to go into terribly great detail.
\nI think it has been well covered by media and other
\ngroups and I think it is going to be a continuing issue
\nof context, but what is free expression in the cloud and
\nhow can we maintain the rights of individuals to express
\nthemselves, but also through the national sovereignties
\nand the national privates of governments to make sure
\nthat they manage their countries and their economies in
\na way which is appropriate.<\/p>\n

They are the challenges on the policy end.<\/p>\n

But the benefits are so manifest and so clear that
\nhopefully we can have a co-dialogue with those issues
\nthat are of concern, those issues of benefit.<\/p>\n

We take healthcare, education, public safety, even
\nissues of finance and banking, as some of the core
\nopportunities that we see through the delivery of the
\ncloud.<\/p>\n

Some are more advanced than others. Banking and
\nfinance is probably an area where most people these days
\nare using the cloud in terms of their financial services
\narrangements and public safety we are seeing
\nincreasingly again. The use of the a cloud for
\ngovernments to maintain everything from pandemics
\nthrough to issues such as warnings around tsunamis and
\nthe other natural disasters.<\/p>\n

In education, we are seeing a generation of students
\nwho are going to learn on line and how do we make sure
\nthat we continue the opportunities for that, not just in
\nthose countries that are well advanced in terms of their
\ndigital pedagogy, but also in terms of countries where
\nthe opportunities for education are so incredibly
\nevident, that we make sure that digital divide isn’t
\nbetween those rich countries that are enable their
\nstudents there I the cloud, but those who can’t.<\/p>\n

Finally, healthcare is obviously been an issue
\nacross countries around the world for a long time and
\nthe US most recently has embraced the discussion quite
\nvigorously.<\/p>\n

In way in which technology can really advance the
\nhealthcare agenda is quite profound. There are issues
\nof privacy, there are issues of accessibility, which
\nwill come into play.<\/p>\n

But we think that the benefits are clearly there and
\nthe opportunities for us to have a dialogue around how
\nwe maintain that responsibility and the opportunity are
\nreally going to be around those four key areas,
\nparticularly for government.<\/p>\n

So you talk about interoperability in terms of this
\npolicy environment, as the cohesion that Markus talked
\nabout.<\/p>\n

If data is becoming stateless, as it crosses
\nplatforms, as it crosses providers, as it crosses
\nborders, it is no longer respecting the traditional way
\nin which goods and services gets transacted.<\/p>\n

Increasing control of that information also means
\nthat we need clarity, is also pretty profound. For
\ndevelopers of applications, they need to know that they
\ncan develop applications that are going to be
\nuniversally beneficial and their intellectual property
\nbe maintained. For customers and citizens and
\nconsumers, you need to know that your data that you
\nprovide to a cloud provider is going to be maintained,
\nthat your information, your identify and your
\nindependent is going to be respected.<\/p>\n

Finally, for service providers like Microsoft who
\nare building the backbone or building the infrastructure
\nfor the cloud, we need to have certainty that where we
\nbuilt our platform, where we put our investments is
\ngoing to be sustainable, not only from an economic
\nperspective or a policy perspective, but even from an
\nenvironmental perspective as well.<\/p>\n

Public policy needs to be working in tandem with the
\ntechnology innovation. Before I came in here, I was
\nhaving a conversation with a journalist from Computer
\nWorld and she asked what is the rule of a CIO in the
\nrole of public policy these days. Pleasingly, CIOs have
\nbeen very involved in the public policy for some time
\nand they are going to be increasingly involved in how we
\ndevise solutions to these very complex problems.<\/p>\n

But equally too policymakers, I said, are going to
\nhave to become more technologically literate because
\nissues are co-existing so discerningly that no
\npolicymaker can think about privacy without thinking
\nabout the cloud.<\/p>\n

Policymakers can think about national security
\nwithout understanding the cloud and the internet.<\/p>\n

So there is that responsibility on policymakers on
\nboth sides to ensure that they are well aversed in the
\ntechnology opportunities and for those technologists to
\nbe well aware that policy does matter and that issues
\nare going to be decided over a longer time that
\npotentially the innovation pipeline.<\/p>\n

How do we future proof our policy arrangements to
\nmake sure that the cloud is enabled in a way which meets
\neveryone’s expectations.<\/p>\n

And how the legal and regulatory frameworks will
\ninter-operate will be critical. How a legislator in one
\ncountry thinks about the impact of their laws with
\nrespect to laws in another country.<\/p>\n

How a law enforcement official thinks about serving
\na subpoena on a particular customer and the data is
\nserved off shore. We need to make sure that as we move
\ntowards this very cloud enabled environment, that
\neveryone from law enforcement agencies right through to
\njudges and other people who are enforcing the laws
\nunderstand the complex arrangements that are in place.<\/p>\n

I want to move to three core areas. The first one
\nis access, the second one is around trust and the third
\none is the ecosystem as I mentioned before, the
\nopportunities for us to build economic and social
\nbenefits through the cloud.<\/p>\n

The first one is about access. I spoke before about
\nthe incredible opportunities that Asia has in terms of
\nbroadband deployment. In fact, earlier this week the
\nWall Street Journal announced a study from a Tokyo based
\norganisation which lists the top four markets in terms
\nof fibre to the home being here in Asia, Hong Kong is
\none, Taiwan, South Korea and Japan.<\/p>\n

You can see that Asia really is in the box seat in
\nterms of the deployment of broadband.<\/p>\n

Across the region, not just in those sort of
\nadvanced markets, we are seeing more than US$45 billion
\nbeing deployed in the delivery of broadband access, from
\ncountries as diverse as Australia and New Zealand, to
\nSingapore, Malaysia and Thailand.<\/p>\n

So we are seeing that broadband is seen to be an
\nincredible investment for governments and also they are
\nnot seeing it just as a stimulus measure, they are
\nseeing the opportunities to build the pipes and towers
\nand to build the connectivity for social and economic
\ndividends in the long term.<\/p>\n

There are various delivery mechanisms and I’m not
\ngoing to go into those here, because I’m sure everyone
\nis well aware of the opportunities that different
\ndeployment modes have for broadband.<\/p>\n

But those different deployment methods are also
\ndriven by the consumer expectations of how they are
\ngoing to deliver their services, be it on a phone, be it
\non a PC, be it on notebooks or E-readers now, so you are
\nseeing the consumer driving in many ways the deployment
\nof the broadband access. We are seeing a two sided
\nmarket as a result on the demand side, customers are
\ndriving the uptake and driving the appetite for
\nbroadband. On the supply side, we are seeing developers
\ntrying to meet that expectation consistently.<\/p>\n

Pleasingly, we are seeing again a co-existence of
\ninterests, but without broadband, it is going to be
\na fairly sort of short journey, because we need that
\nconnectivity to be universal, we need it to be
\naffordable and we need it to be reliable if we are going
\nto ensure that the cloud meets its potential.<\/p>\n

In terms of the benefits, I mentioned before about
\nthe huge endowment that is being created here in Asia.<\/p>\n

But some studies in terms of what it means for
\nnational economies is pretty exciting.<\/p>\n

A company study recently indicated that
\na 10 per cent increase in broadband can deliver a 1.5
\nincrease in labour productivity and more importantly,
\nthose top tier broadband access countries enjoy
\na 2 per cent higher GDP dividend than those in the
\nbottom tier. Again, pleasingly, we are seeing many
\ncountries in Asia being at the top end of the broadband
\ntier, but we are also in a diverse region, where Asia
\nPacific is also to many countries at the bottom end of
\nthat tier.<\/p>\n

How do we make sure that we don’t have again the
\ndivide between those who have access and those who
\ndon’t?<\/p>\n

We are going to talk about the opportunities in
\nparticularly one country and that’s Indonesia.<\/p>\n

Again, the lower tier of broadband access, only
\n13 per cent of people in Indonesia have access to what
\nwe call broadband.<\/p>\n

But there are more than 30 million mobile
\nsubscribers in that marketplace and that’s the third
\nhighest in the world.<\/p>\n

But it is one of the largest countries in the world,
\nfourth largest country in the world, 240 million people,
\nbut across 17,000 islands.<\/p>\n

Fibre to the home or fibre to the village is
\nprobably not going to be a realistic expectation in
\nIndonesia, so it is going to be across a different array
\nof deployment means.<\/p>\n

Potentially, how do you look at the 30 per cent of
\nIndonesia to have a mobile phone and think about maybe
\nthat being the cloud enabled device. It mightn’t
\nnecessarily be Facebook or a social networking site or
\nsearch, you might be around something more fundamental.
\nIt might be somebody around microbanking, it might be
\naround healthcare. In that part of the world,
\nparticularly national safety, giving people early
\nwarnings around earthquakes or tsunamis in a way which
\nis sensitive and meaningful to that environment.<\/p>\n

Also we are thinking about how do you create anchor
\ninstitutions through broadband this that marketplace.<\/p>\n

Universities, health providers, schools, libraries,
\nhow can they be the nodes for high spread broadband that
\nthe citizens can get benefit from by accessing that
\nendowment by Indonesia early.<\/p>\n

The opportunity for Indonesia is incredibly
\nprofound.<\/p>\n

It’s challenging, because of the geography. It is
\nchallenging because of the social and economic
\ninfrastructure.<\/p>\n

But think about the opportunities for the fourth
\nlargest country in the world to leapfrog some of the
\ntechnology investments to really create an opportunity
\nfor its economy and for its people.<\/p>\n

The second area I want to talk about is confidence
\nin the cloud and I want to make sure I’m not going to go
\nover time.<\/p>\n

Because with access comes responsibility.<\/p>\n

That’s either for individuals or for organisations
\nor government.<\/p>\n

The test for us is how we work together to ensure
\nthat we are building confidence in the cloud.<\/p>\n

Microsoft has a programme or I suppose it’s really
\na philosophy that runs through the company and it’s
\ncalled our trustworthy computing experience, because we
\nhave had the experience where we haven’t been the
\ntrusted mol el for delivery of services or delivery of
\nsafe and secure technology experiences.<\/p>\n

We have learned hard and we changed our entire
\nproduct development cycle with that trustworthy
\ncomputing experience at its very heart.<\/p>\n

We think that that label, that expression, how you
\nwant to re-cast it, is very important right across the
\ntechnology ecosystem, because without trust, people
\nwon’t use the services and without those services,
\npeople won’t get the benefit.<\/p>\n

The technology is not just a vector for the security
\nand risks, it can also be a solution.<\/p>\n

We are thinking quite clearly at how cloud can be
\na safe and security platform for people to have
\nconfidence in, but at the same time we are very aware
\nthat as you create that honey pot, as you create data in
\none spot, that it also will be very attractive port for
\ncriminals and bad actors to try to get access.<\/p>\n

In some parts of the world, again this part of the
\nworld particularly, a lot of customers are concerned
\nabout what government access to that information is. We
\nneed transparency from governments about what their
\nmotivations and their laws are going to be with respect
\nto access to information.<\/p>\n

That’s not unique to Asia. The US is also a very
\nproblematic place where customers are seeing access to
\ndata. The Patriot Act and other legislative instruments
\nare causing concerns for governments and large
\ncompanies, any organisation that may host in the United
\nStates or maybe a US based provider.<\/p>\n

There are transparencies in the way the US is
\nmanaging its access to data. In some ways, that is
\nshowing an opportunity for Asian countries and in Europe
\nto have detailed and quite clear understanding of what
\nthe terms of governments role in accessing data for
\nnational security and other goals as well.<\/p>\n

We say that there are three key elements for
\nensuring that we get confidence in the cloud and that’s
\na strong deterrence and enforcement and that’s obviously
\na responsibility for the development of the software,
\nbut also to the enforcement at the law enforcement end.
\nLegal frameworks encourage information sharing across
\nlaw enforcement officials and police agencies and again,
\nthat collaboration that is so important to making sure
\nthat this global network of environment, that global
\nnetwork of information, that things are shared in
\nrealtime and that those collaborations are clearly made
\nearly on.<\/p>\n

Security will be a major challenge for not only
\ngovernments and for service providers, but we also need
\nto educate consumers and customers about what their role
\nis to be safe and secure citizens in the cloud enabled
\nenvironment. What are their responsibilities as well.<\/p>\n

They need to make sure that they understand what the
\nrisks are in moving information on-line.<\/p>\n

But also to what they can do to protect themselves,
\nprotect I suppose their PC and their devices and protect
\ntheir integrity and their independence and identity.<\/p>\n

I said before that privacy is a very close cousin,
\nalmost a co-writer with security.<\/p>\n

Because security is about deterring attacks, but
\nprivacy in many ways is a very organic concept.<\/p>\n

In the European idea of privacy is very different
\nthan what concept of privacy here is in Asian Pacific.<\/p>\n

But as the cloud and as the internet has shown, that
\nprivacy can be a very contentious issue, very quickly
\nacross multiple jurisdictions all at once.<\/p>\n

We are seeing the data that’s collected for
\nlegitimate reasons can easily be used inadvertently
\noften times for illegitimate reasons.<\/p>\n

And that illegitimate reasons may just be a personal
\nview on what they believe to be a privacy breach. It
\nmight necessarily be illegal, but it might in I I’ll not
\nsit with their own personal values or their personal
\nexpectations of that.<\/p>\n

We are engaging in a dialogue and most of the
\nindustry is engaging in realtime dialogues as to what
\nthose tradeoffs are, how do we ensure that we don’t step
\nover people’s understanding of what the expectations of
\nprivacy are, but at the same time, understand that the
\nservices they can deliver often times for free, will
\nrequire a certain privacy tradeoff.<\/p>\n

How many people in the room are Facebook subscribers
\nor Facebook users?<\/p>\n

I suppose again hands up here who reads the privacy
\npolicies very carefully on Facebook?<\/p>\n

Those privacy policies can be sometimes three
\nscreens long.<\/p>\n

That may be very detailed and very appropriate, but
\nwe’re also working within the industry to have some
\nsimple privacy policies, little boilerplates that people
\ncan understand, who are the core principles they need to
\nunderstand. But there will probably always be those
\nthree screens of privacy policy, because they do need to
\nbe there to protect the innocent and guilty.<\/p>\n

But increasingly, it’s ensuring that there is
\na dialogue between consumers and those service providers
\nabout what privacy really means.<\/p>\n

We are also seeing that privacy can be a bit of
\na trade barrier between that flow of information.<\/p>\n

The EU probably is a gold standard in the eyes of
\nmany privacy advocates around how data is managed.<\/p>\n

In other parts of the world, where I live in
\nSingapore, there isn’t a national privacy law.<\/p>\n

Information of a certain nature cannot lead the
\nEuropean Union to come to Singapore. Singapore has the
\naspiration to be the data centre for Asia. It wants to
\nbe net importer of information, it wants to use that
\nincredible endowment around technology to really be an
\neconomic enabler.<\/p>\n

I think Hong Kong probably shares many ways those
\naspirations as well.<\/p>\n

But Singapore without a national privacy law is
\nbasically going to ringfence itself from many of the
\nother jurisdictions around the world. We don’t believe
\nwe are going to be able to change the European Union’s
\nview on privacy, but we might be able to change the view
\nof Singapore’s government of the understanding that
\nprivacy is going to be a tariff barrier in a very free
\nworld of information.<\/p>\n

So you are making sure that we have a discussion
\naround the privacy patchwork and where are the seams
\ngoing to be the and where the common patches are going
\nto be.<\/p>\n

We are not going to see one national privacy or
\ninternational privacy law around the world. The US
\ndoesn’t even have a national privacy law, so we are not
\ngoing to expect to see it across international borders
\nas well.<\/p>\n

But we need to see where the harmonisation of those
\nlaws and the understanding of that patchwork maybe sort
\nof unpick some seams and make sure just be aware of
\nwhere there is going to be some tension and where some
\nbarriers are going to be in that free flow of
\ninformation.<\/p>\n

Last I’ll, I want to about the fostering of the
\necosystem around the cloud.<\/p>\n

Just thinking about the national competitiveness,
\nthat is thinking about the opportunities for developers,
\nthat is thinking about the opportunity for even small to
\nmedium enterprises to really leverage the cloud
\ninfrastructure.<\/p>\n

In economist terms, cloud is known as a general
\npurpose technology, it almost supersedes many other
\ntechnologies, in terms of its benefit, it terms of its
\ndividends it is going to provide. It can lower barriers
\nof entry, it reduces costs, for instance, you don’t
\nnecessarily have to build your own data you can move to
\nan operation model and allows flexibility. It’s
\nelastic, it can move with you, if you have to buy nor
\nstorage, if you have the buy more capacity, you can buy
\nthe same way you are buying electricity.<\/p>\n

But how do we also enable this opportunity through
\nthese incredible sort of benefits there I the cloud.<\/p>\n

For sectors such as the SME sector. Microsoft
\nrecently commissioned a survey to look at globally what
\nsmall and medium enterprises think about the cloud.<\/p>\n

Again, it’s very pleasing to see that Asia is ahead
\nof the curve.<\/p>\n

30 per cent of SMEs here in Asia are using the cloud
\nversus a global average of 261 per cent. What we are
\nseeing is that 52 per cent saw the benefits in the cloud
\nversus an average of 46 per cent.<\/p>\n

What does this mean for a country within the Asian
\nPacific region? Let’s take Malaysia for example.<\/p>\n

Malaysia is a market where 99 per cent of businesses
\nin that environment are small to medium enterprises,
\nrepresenting about 47 per cent of GDP and 65 per cent of
\nthe workforce. Low ICT penetration but a very high
\nbroadband expectation. The Malaysian government is
\nworking very hard to meet their objectives of 2012 in
\nterms of broadband deployment, but the government does
\nhave a plan.<\/p>\n

So the broadband will be delivered, but if SMEs
\naren’t using that back haul, aren’t using that
\ninvestment, then we are not going to the benefits to
\nsuch a dramatic part of the economy.<\/p>\n

The opportunities for us to drive the deployment of
\nthe cloud services to the SME is very important and
\nthat’s really going to require education on how to use
\ntechnology and how to become digital citizens.<\/p>\n

But it’s also going to require governments to think
\ncarefully about how they are going to inspire and
\nencourage citizens and enterprises to adopt technology,
\nbe it the physical technology like a PC, right through
\nto being able to give affordable broadband as well.<\/p>\n

We are also seeing that the opportunities to deliver
\nthe services in that country like Malaysia around
\nhealthcare and education are also incredibly exciting
\nand we hope given such a strong part of the community
\nsuch as this SME sector, maybe in some ways the first
\nmove in terms of the opportunities around broadband,
\nthat then consider second dividend be around the areas
\nof education and healthcare.<\/p>\n

I’m going to conclude by talking just a little bit
\nabout what we think the role for Asia will be in terms
\nof that common market, that regional complexion for the
\ninformation flow.<\/p>\n

If the 20th century really was, the latter part of
\nthe 20th century was really the engineer of economic
\ndevelopment around the trade of goods and services, we
\nthink the 21st century really should be looking to
\ninclude data in that same narrative, this that same
\ndialogue.<\/p>\n

How people can look at the common market for data
\nwithin their trade and economic integration discussions.<\/p>\n

Again, Asia is probably again at the leading edge of
\na lot of these discussions. We have pan regional forums
\nlike ASEAN or APEC or even the transpacific partnership
\nwhich is a more discrete set of Asian Pacific
\nstakeholders.<\/p>\n

But if there’s one thing that I suppose gels and is
\ncohesive across Asia, it is trade and closer economic
\nintegration. We are not going to see a European Union
\nemerge. We are not going to see a federation like
\na United States emerge, what we will see is
\na co-existence of interests and how do we think about
\nthe trade in data being as important as the trade in any
\nother physical commodity.<\/p>\n

But without an understanding of what is a foreign
\nexchange mechanism for that data, it is going to be
\nrather limited discussion.<\/p>\n

It took 80 years for there to be a common for
\nexchange currency, so we are not expecting this thing to
\nhappen overnight, but we do expect those well advanced
\nand the muscle that has been developed around trade
\ndiscussions to be used in the same discussions around
\nthe trade information and the trade of any other
\nphysical good as well.<\/p>\n

Let me give you an example of what we need of that.
\nI’ll use Singapore because I live there and it has been
\na real current discussion.<\/p>\n

If Singapore again wants to be this data centre for
\nAsia, not even Asia, wants to be a global data centre,
\nand it wants to import information, we understand that
\nthere are issues with sending information from Europe to
\nSingapore and so there is a non-trade tariff barrier
\nthere.<\/p>\n

But equally, how does the Singapore government treat
\ninformation that might be sitting in a data centre
\nthat’s the information that is not local, it’s not
\nindigenous, it just comes from a foreign source, it is
\nhosted there and going to be sent off somewhere else.
\nWe are talking about potentially free trade zones within
\ncountries for data. Almost bonded warehouses for
\ninformation.<\/p>\n

It’s a concept that we are floating out there
\nbecause we have no other brilliant way of describing it.
\nPotentially, if information is going to be treated in
\nthe same way as any other good in a free port, it’s not
\ngoing to find its way into the marketplace. It is
\nsimply being stored there and going to be accessed from
\nthere from some other information stakeholder, then why
\nshould the Singapore government have any interest in
\nwhat resides there.<\/p>\n

But we are seeing concerns from customers around the
\nworld for information in our data centre in Singapore,
\nbe it issues of free expression, be it issues of
\ncensorship, but the Singapore government has told us
\nquite clearly we are not interested in those issues,
\nbecause they are not domestic.<\/p>\n

But until Singapore government properly evangelises
\nthose comments to the global environment, it’s going to
\nbe hard for stakeholders in Australia or where else to
\nunderstand that my data will be protected, that my
\nidentity and my privacy will be protected from the laws
\nthat might be indistinction from Singapore citizen in
\nthat same marketplace.<\/p>\n

Again, complex issues, really exciting issues at the
\nsame time, but why not.<\/p>\n

Again, the Asia the trade forums. My colleague
\nStefan who is from Brussels talks about the fact that if
\nEurope came together 50 years ago around coal and steel,
\npotentially Asia can come together around trade and
\ndata. This is the foundry of innovation. This is the
\nengine room for economic evenerjy around the world.<\/p>\n

Again, the incredible innovation we are seeing
\nwithin the ITC community in Asia really compels
\ngovernments around this region, that comes physical
\ngoods as well.<\/p>\n

We think that cloud can be that incredible leveller
\nof dialogue as well.<\/p>\n

Technology has been a leveller of opportunity and
\nindependent for so many and we see the opportunities for
\nAsia being profound.<\/p>\n

There are countries which have had incredible
\nendowment in terms of the technology investments. We
\nalso see some large gaps in other markets across the
\nregion, in terms of where the opportunity does need to
\nbe incubated.<\/p>\n

But we think that using the regional forums
\nbilateral trade agreements, regional forums, even global
\ntrade treaties can provide an opportunity for those
\ncountries which are at the lower ends of the spectrum to
\nbe helped in terms of their innovation and in terms of
\naccess and infrastructure.<\/p>\n

Again, the public policy environment doesn’t need to
\nbe treated as whole. You could do it by sector, by
\npolicy initiative, privacy or security or as country
\nlike Singapore which is thinking about the whole nation
\nICT cloud economic development policy.<\/p>\n

There is no better time than right now for Asia to
\nseize the opportunities.<\/p>\n

Again, while other parts of the world are thinking
\nabout austerity measures, I don’t think the word
\nausterity is mentioned in the certainly not when I was
\nin Shanghai on the weekend. It’s just an incredible
\nbuses to be in this part of the world, where there is
\nsuch a dynamic and such an exciting environment against
\nwhich to set the compass for a technology edge abled
\nsociety and technology enabled economy.<\/p>\n

With that, I’ll leave it and thank you for the
\nopportunity. If I have gone over time, I apologise.
\nI get very excited about this.<\/p>\n

I have the opportunity to probably be around for the
\nres of the day if anyone wants to ask questions, but
\nI really thank you for your time.<\/p>\n

Thank you for your time.<\/p>\n

I really hope that the next IGF I get an opportunity
\nto show you some of the advantages that we have done as
\nwell.<\/p>\n

Thank you.<\/p>\n

>> : Thank you, Mr Galligan.<\/p>\n

Today open WiFi is available to all of you. Power
\nsockets are on the floor in case you need to charge your
\nlaptop. Tonight’s conference dinner will be served at
\nCyberport here. Participants must get a ticket to
\nenter. If you have registered but do not have a ticket,
\nplease go to the registration desk to ask for one.<\/p>\n

Besides, each registered participant will have
\ninvitation free of charge. Please collect it near the
\nregistration table.<\/p>\n

The number of each size of T-shirts is limited and
\nit is given out on first come, first serve basis.<\/p>\n

As a reminder for our moderator panellist speakers,
\nwe will have a VIP room today. Coffee and tea is served
\nand where you can have the off line discussion there.<\/p>\n

If you go through that door, it is the first room
\nalong the corridor.<\/p>\n

Now we will have the coffee break. Tea and coffee
\nwill be served on my left-hand side, outside the room.<\/p>\n

We will be back at 11.45.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Opening Ceremony\/Welcoming Speech, Keynote Opening Session ________________________________________________________________________ REAL TIME TRANSCRIPT: Opening Ceremony\/Welcoming Speech, Keynote Opening Session Hong Kong IGF 9:45:00-11:00, Thursday 17 June 2010 Hong Kong DISCLAIMER: Due to the inherent difficulties in capturing a live speaker’s words, it is possible this realtime transcript may contain errors and mistranslations. An edited version of the realtime … <\/p>\n

Continue reading “Hong Kong IGF \u2013 June 17th, 2010: Session 1”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"class_list":["post-361","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/event.rigf.asia\/2010\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/361","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/event.rigf.asia\/2010\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/event.rigf.asia\/2010\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/event.rigf.asia\/2010\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/event.rigf.asia\/2010\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=361"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/event.rigf.asia\/2010\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/361\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":558,"href":"https:\/\/event.rigf.asia\/2010\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/361\/revisions\/558"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/event.rigf.asia\/2010\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=361"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}