There are two points worth noting about the IPCC WG2 AR2 lead authors meeting in San Francisco.
First, a conflict of interest is now in place. Essentially, we all signed a form declaring that we have no conflicts of interest. This is defined narrowly: pecuniary, personal, direct benefit from deliberate bias. There is no audit of these declarations, and they will not be made public. The IPCC pretends that its authors operate in their personal capacity, even if people work on their chapters in their bosses' time. Conflicts of interest that arise because IPCC authors are also journal editors, PhD advisors, researchers, fund raisers, referees, and what nots are deemed irrelevant.
Energy Economics, an academic journal, has decided that the IPCC poses a conflict of interest and a potential risk for the reputation of the journal. The journal editors will refrain from handling papers that are relevant to the IPCC chapters they are involved with as authors.
Second, the IPCC member states have ruled on freedom of information legislation. Specifically, it has been decided that FoI does not apply to IPCC material. This is false. FoI is national legislation. These laws can only be interpreted by the relevant courts. These laws can only be changed by the relevant parliaments. The civil servants that speak on behalf of their countries have no right to usurp FoI legislation, and the IPCC has no say in this matter.