security. It would be beneficial to note that there was no consensus on such a purpose. A separate paragraph regarding possible characteristics of a dialogue would be welcome (G59 and G63). H. Conclusions and Recommendations We welcome the structure of this section and wealth of possible recommendations for consideration. We suggest streamlining these recommendations – for instance, multiple repositories may be unmanageable or ineffective. Where consensus exists, we may then consider whether the specifics of implementation of each recommendation can be agreed, including on a cost-neutral basis. The UK will be pleased to consider supporting, subject to further discussion and specifics, many of these recommendations. However, we are currently unable to support referral to the International Law Commission (H68A). We think it would be premature to engage the ILC at this time, and consider it advisable to wait until there is a broader and deeper understanding amongst States as to how international law applies. The UK may be able to support inclusion of certain recommendations subject to modifications and discussion of specifics of implementation. This includes:    ‘a repository of national practices regarding international rules, norms and principles…’ (H68B). Recommendations H68A and H68B should not overlap. If both are to be pursued H68B should focus on State implementation of norms whilst H68A addresses international law. ‘establish a global mechanism for enhancing coherence in capacity-building efforts…’ (H68D) Our primary concern is to see as much resource as possible directed to capacity building in a coordinated manner. The establishment of additional mechanisms could increase the existing coordination challenge, whilst diverting much needed funding to its set up costs. We propose the following alternative wording: The Secretary General be requested to call on Member States and stakeholders, including traditional development organizations and industry partners, to make available funding and resource in support of international capacity building on cybersecurity. All those in a position to contribute such expertise or resources to existing global mechanisms for enhancing coherence in capacity-building efforts in the use of ICTs, including at the regional and sub-regional levels, should do so. (H68D) ‘to identify and protect national and transnational critical infrastructure…’ (H68D) We propose the inclusion ‘to cooperate, including with stakeholders’ on the basis of the extensive involvement of a broad range of stakeholders in the provision, operation and maintenance of critical national infrastructure. The UK proposes inclusion of the following recommendations:    As part of H68C: Member States which have, or are developing, ICT capabilities which may be used in military contexts, be encouraged to acknowledge the existence of these capabilities at the organisational level and provide general information on the legal and oversight regimes under which they operate. ‘ICT-related capacity-building efforts in the field of international security should be guided by the following principles:’ Inclusive partnerships and shared responsibility; Ownership; Sustainability: Trust, transparency and accountability. (H68D) These principles reflect the Busan Principles adapted to the ICT context. That the report of the Informal intersessional consultative meeting of the OEWG with industry, non-governmental organizations and academia (2-4 December 2019) be annexed to the OEWG report.