Strasbourg, 23 June 2011 CDLR-Bu(2011)18
Item 12 of the agenda
BUREAU OF THE
EUROPEAN COMMITTEE ON LOCAL AND REGIONAL DEMOCRACY
(CDLR)
PREPARATION OF THE JOINT BUREAUX MEETING
Secretariat Memorandum
prepared by the
Directorate General of Democracy and Political Affairs
Directorate of Democratic Institutions
 |
Introduction
The last Joint Bureaux meeting took place in January 2011. The Congress Bureau has meanwhile adopted a draft report of the meeting and it is now for the CDLR Bureau to examine it. The draft meeting report is appended.
Furthermore, the Bureau may wish to consider whether a further joint Bureaux meeting should be envisaged prior to the 17th Session of the Ministerial Conference.
For information, the Congress Bureau will hold the following meetings:
- 16 September 2011, Ukraine
- 17 October 2011, Strasbourg, France
The 21st Session of the Congress in Strasbourg starts on 18 October 2011.
Action required
The Bureau is invited to examine the draft meeting report of the Joint Bureaux meeting of 14 January 2011 and to decide about envisaging a second such meeting prior to the 17th session of the Ministerial Conference.
APPENDIX
CG/BUR(20)8
16 June 2011
CONFIDENTIAL
MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING
OF THE BUREAU OF THE CONGRESS WITH THE BUREAU OF THE CDLR
Strasbourg, Room 8
14 January 2011, 15.00 – 17.00
Adopted by the Bureau of the Congress on 16 June 2011
Opening of the meeting and welcome by Keith Whitmore, President of the Congress
The meeting was opened and chaired jointly by Keith Whitmore, President of the Congress, and Andriy Guk, Chair of the CDLR. The list of participants and the agenda are set out in Appendices 1 and 2.
Adoption of the agenda
The agenda [CG/BUR(19)19] for the joint meeting was adopted.
Congress priorities 2011-2012
Keith Whitmore outlined the priorities which the Congress had set itself for 2011 and 2012 through the adoption of Resolution 310 (2010) in October 2010. The five main focal points of the Congress’s future activities were: more systematic monitoring of local and regional democracy in member states; targeted assistance for member states to make it easier for them to implement the recommendations arising from the monitoring reports; further development of observation of local and regional elections and follow-up of recommendations; special emphasis on the human rights dimension in local and regional governance, and the streamlining of the thematic activities of the Congress, so that they were consistent with the Council’s core values. He added that the Congress also wished to develop a programme of activities with the Committee of the Regions along these lines.
Paul Rowsell said he wanted to see constructive working relations with the Congress based on common objectives, to be discussed at meetings of the Chaves Group. When it met in March, the Chaves Group would place on the agenda a discussion on follow-up to the assistance provided to member states and the Congress would be invited to outline its activities in this area. Paul Rowsell felt that the Centre of Expertise should be involved in assisting member states, in order to pool the resources available on both sides. Given the importance of this meeting, he proposed that it be opened up to the Permanent Representatives so that they understood all the issues at stake.
Keith Whitmore said that the Congress was willing to engage in a dialogue on this issue. The Congress would not think of preparing reports without giving some consideration to appropriate follow-up and the provision of assistance.
Fabio Pellegrini welcomed the opportunity afforded by this joint meeting with the CDLR Bureau. With regard to what Paul Rowsell had said, he wished to stress the need for local authorities to have the right to take decisions and act independently of central government. He felt that the monitoring of local democracy in member states carried out by the Congress on the basis of the European Charter of Local Self-Government had changed things at local level, but he could also understand that governments needed to be more cautious.
Herwig Van Staa encouraged the CDLR to co-operate with the Congress without seeking to dictate to it what it should do. In his view, co-operation with the CDLR was hard work at times because central governments were unwilling to accept that they did not have primary responsibility for towns and this created awkward situations in the fledgling democracies. He added that if the Council of Europe wanted to fully do its job, it could not afford to overlook the development of local and regional democracy.
Paul-Henri Philips suggested starting afresh and assured participants that the CDLR did not mean to give orders to the Congress.
Paul Rowsell replied to Herwig Van Staa, saying that he was looking forward to having fruitful discussions at the next meeting of the Chaves Group in March. He acknowledged that the CDLR and the GR-DEM were made up of government officials, but at a time when representatives at all levels (governments, parliaments, local and regional councillors) were facing budget cuts, it was quite obvious, in his view, that they would all have to join forces so as to achieve better results and greater impact with increasingly limited resources.
CDLR priorities
Andriy Guk, Chair of the CDLR, thanked the Congress for inviting the CDLR Bureau to this joint meeting and gave a brief overview for the period 2010-2013 [CDLR(2010)26], describing what the CDLR was planning to do to implement the Utrecht Agenda. He also referred participants to a table in this document which listed the challenges identified by the CDLR in the Utrecht Agenda and showed the strands of action by entity/programme: CDLR, Centre of Expertise for Local Government Reform, Strategy for Innovation and Good Governance at Local Level, co-operation and assistance programmes and European Local Democracy Week.
Keith Whitmore thanked Andriy Guk for his presentation.
Paul-Henri Philips added that with, among other things, the staging of the ministerial conference in Kyiv and the inclusion of human rights in the work of the CDLR, and with limited budgetary resources, it was becoming increasingly clear that the Congress and the CDLR needed to work together.
Activities and progress of the work of the Chaves group
Keith Whitmore quickly went over the meeting of the Chaves Group that had been held the previous day, i.e. on 13 January. Agenda items had included discussion of the 16 replies to the questionnaire sent out to ministers responsible for local and regional government [AG(2011)1] and the reply sent separately by Keith Whitmore on behalf of the Congress [LetterWhitmore]; co-operation between the Congress and the CDLR; the role of the Congress in the Conference of Ministers responsible for local and regional government; and the monitoring activities and an assessment of the work of the Congress and the CDLR.
Activities of the Centre of Expertise on Local Government Reform
Dan Popescu, Head of the Centre of Expertise on Local Government Reform, gave a brief update on the 2010 activities (19 programmes in 15 countries), based on the activity report that he had submitted to the Centre’s Advisory Board. He had noted an upsurge in requests, including from countries that did not usually seek assistance from the Centre, such as Malta, Italy and France.
In the context of the budgetary reform, the outlook for the future was not encouraging, and extra funding would be vital in 2011 in order to improve co-operation with the Congress, CDLR and other partners.
Dan Popescu told participants that he had presented the Advisory Board with some new ideas about how to improve the follow-up to activities (including a programme of assistance for central governments). He reminded participants that the Centre provided expertise of a practical and technical nature, which did not in any way encroach on the political sphere. For example, the Centre had been invited by the Ukrainian authorities to examine their country’s legislation in the light of the European Charter of Local Self-Government.
Dan Popescu concluded by mentioning some proposals for improving the work of the Advisory Board and the discussion under way in order to fine-tune the guidelines on the operation of the Centre. He believed that if the Centre was to have a greater impact, CDLR and Congress members needed to be more involved and that this matter should be discussed shortly.
Keith Whitmore thanked Dan Popescu for moving the debate forward.
Paul Rowsell added that the Centre of Expertise was a valuable asset for the Council of Europe. The United Kingdom had been among those responsible for its establishment (decided at the Warsaw Summit in May 2005) and had supported it ever since. He noted that the topics addressed by the Centre changed according to the needs and said it was essential to make maximum possible use of it. The Chaves Group was working to that end.
Strategy for Innovation and Good Governance at Local Level
Paul-Henri Philips explained that this strategy helped to raise local authorities’ profile in that it invited them to make ongoing improvements to their governance by providing them with the means to assess the progress made, based on the 12 principles of good democratic governance at local level. In this way, it encouraged them to be more democratic.
In Paul-Henri Philips’s view, this Strategy was the engine behind any Council of Europe action: ethical participation, quality of ballots, quality of government, etc.
The Strategy also included the award of a European quality label on innovation and good governance to local authorities that had achieved a high overall standard of governance in the light of the principles referred to above. Several countries (France, the Netherlands, Belgium) were already positioning themselves to win this label.
Karl-Heinz Lambertz spoke of the interest of this Strategy, which in his view was a positive element in the preparation of common agendas as part of the co-operation with the CDLR. He said that Belgium’s German-speaking municipalities would not want to be outdone.
European Local Democracy Week (ELDW)
Keith Whitmore said that the next ELDW would run from 10 to 16 October 2011 and that the Congress had appointed a new ELDW co-ordinator in the person of John Warmisham (United Kingdom, L, SOC). A co-ordination meeting would be held on 8 February in Brussels with the main parties involved in this event, in the presence of the mayors of the 17 municipalities that had been the most active in the 2010 ELDW and designated “12-Star Cities”. One of the aims of this meeting would be to decide the theme for the 2011 event, which would probably be “implementation of human rights at local level”. A staunch supporter of the ELDW since its inception, Keith Whitmore felt there was room for greater involvement of Congress members in publicising the event.
Paul-Henri Philips pointed out that the Belgian government had backed this initiative from the outset and said he was glad that the Congress had managed to continue providing the necessary funds to sustain it. He said that the CDLR wished to remain actively involved because European Local Democracy Week was a major factor in raising the Council of Europe’s profile among local authorities. He underlined the need to work together to find a way of improving the visibility of the respective activities of the Congress and the CDLR.
Keith Whitmore invited everyone present at the meeting to watch the DVD produced by Belgium on the organisation of this event.
State of preparation of the Conference of Ministers responsible for local and regional government (Kyiv, Ukraine, November 2011) – Congress’s contribution
Andriy Guk said that the development of local democracy featured prominently among the priorities of the Ukrainian Chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers (May-November 2011) and looked briefly at the activities that appeared on Ukraine’s roadmap between now and the ministerial conference in Kyiv.
The first part concerned a series of conferences: beginning of June in Kharkiv, a conference on implementation of the 3rd protocol to the Madrid Convention; end of June in Kyiv, a conference on decentralisation; mid-October in Donetsk, during Local Democracy Week, hearings with municipalities on the implementation of the Strategy.
The second part related to the presentation of Ukraine’s experience on the path to democratic reform and the participation of senior Ukrainian officials in forthcoming sessions of the Congress. In this connection, Andriy Guk asked the Congress to invite Viktor Tykhonov, Deputy Prime Minister, and Minister for Regional Development, Construction, Housing and the Municipal Economy, who was eager to address the Congress at its 20th Session.
The third part proposed study visits for Ukrainian representatives (local and regional elected officials, NGOs, academics) to familiarise them with the Council of Europe’s achievements in the field of local and regional democracy and in particular with the structures, instruments and priorities of the Congress.
Andriy Guk went on to provide some information about the ministerial conference that was to be held in the main room of Kyiv City Hall, and for which a sizeable budget had been allocated. Viktor Tykhonov would officiate as master of ceremonies. The conference would begin with a reception on 2 November, followed by the conference on 3 November and a social programme on 4 November, the practical arrangements for which were still being discussed. The key themes of the conference would include human rights at local level, the principles of good governance at local level, discussion of the Chaves report, the impact of the crisis on local and regional authorities and governments’ responses, transfrontier co-operation and an assessment of the implementation of the Utrecht Declaration.
Keith Whitmore and other members of the Congress Bureau pointed out that, historically, the Congress had always been involved in the preparations for this Conference because the topics addressed were of major relevance to the Congress which was eager to make an active and effective contribution to the event through its representatives, who were elected members of local and regional authorities.
Paul-Henri Philips reassured the Congress on this point, saying that it remained a key partner.
Human rights dimension at local and regional level
Keith Whitmore said that the Congress has considerable experience in this area. In March 2010, it had adopted a recommendation on the implementation of human rights at local and regional level. This recommendation entrusts the Monitoring Committee with taking the opportunity raised by the follow-up visits to promote and sensitise local authorities to human rights at local level. The Congress Rapporteur on human rights, Lars O. Molin, who in the meantime had been elected chair of the Monitoring Committee, was carrying out his tasks with conviction. He had recently met with, among others, the Human Rights Commissioner Thomas Hammarberg who has often recalled the need of improving human rights at local and regional level and who therefore strongly supports the Congress’s action on this issue.
Paul Rowsell added that, where human rights were concerned, the intergovernmental sector and the Congress must join forces to move the debate forward, with each making its own contribution to the process.
Following on from this, Paul-Henri Philips said that the CDLR Bureau had decided to devote the next meeting of the Committee of Experts on good democratic governance at local and regional level (LR-GG) (Strasbourg, 9 May) to human rights and local authorities. He proposed that a preliminary document be drafted, summarising a joint CDLR/Congress approach to be presented at the ministerial conference in Kyiv. To that end, he invited the Congress to participate in a workshop on participatory budgeting that was to be held on 10 May 2011 by the LR-GG and the Committee of Experts on local and regional finance and public services (LR-FS).
Keith Whitmore thanked him and said that he would consult Lars O. Molin on this matter.
Other business
The last speech was by Paul-Henri Philips and concerned the impact of the Treaty of Lisbon on the European Charter of Local Self-Government. In his view, this treaty had tangible implications for local and regional governance and it was important therefore to examine the various articles of the Charter through the prism of the Lisbon Treaty to see whether they needed revising. He proposed, on behalf of the CDLR, that the Congress and the CDLR team up to co-finance a study on the compatibility of the European Charterof Local Self-Government and the Lisbon Treaty.
Keith Whitmore declared the meeting closed at 5.08 pm.
Appendix 1
List of participants
CONGRESS
Bureau members/Membres du Bureau:
Keith Whitmore (United Kingdom/Royaume-Uni, R, ILDG/GILD), President of the Congress and
President of the ILDG Group
Herwig Van Staa (Austria/Autriche, R, PPE/DC-EPP/CD), President of the Chamber of Regions and
President of the EPP/CD Group
Jean-Claude Frécon (France, L, SOC), President of the Chamber of Local Authorities
Nataliya Romanova (Ukraine, R, GILD/ILDG)
Gaye Doganoglu (Turkey/Turquie, L, PPE/DC-EPP/CD)
Ludmila Sfirloaga (Romania/Roumanie, R, SOC)
Birgit Collin-Langen (Germany/Allemagne, L, PPE/DC-EPP/CD)
Helena Pihlajasaari, (Finland/Finlande, R, SOC)
Onno Van Veldhuizen (Netherlands/Pays Bas, L, GILD-ILDG)
Svetlana Orlova (Russian Fed./Féd. de Russie, R, PPE/DC-EPP/CD)
Dubravka Suica (Croatia/Croatie, L, PPE/DC-EPP/CD)
Fabio Pellegrini (Italy/Italie, L, SOC)
President of the political groups of the Congress/Présidents des groupes politiques:
Günther Krug (Germany/Allemagne, R, SOC)
Chairs of the committees/Présidents des commissions:
Lars O. Molin (Suède/Sweden, L, PPE/DC-EPP/CD): Monitoring /Commission de suivi
Karl-Heinz Lambertz (Belgique/Belgium, R, SOC): Governance /Commission de la gouvernance
Emin Yeritsyan (Armenia/Arménie, L, PPE/DC-EPP/CD): Current Affairs /Commission des questions d’actualités
Other/Autres
Tamara Davtyan (adviser to Emin Yeritsyan)
Andreas Greiter (adviser to Herwig Van Staa and Secretary of delegation)
Nikolai Kartsev (adviser to Nataliya Romanova and Secretary of delegation)
Larissa Pavlova (adviser to Svetlana Orlova)
Christina Rydberg (adviser to Anders Knape and Secretary of delegation)
Heikki Telakivi (adviser to Helena Pihlajasaari and Secretary of delegation)
Secretariat of the Congress/Secrétariat du Congrès:
- Andreas Kiefer, Secretary General of the Congress
- Jean-Philippe Bozouls, Executive Secretary of the Chamber of Local Authorities
- Jean-Paul Chauvet, Executive Secretary of the Chamber of Regions
- Dolores Ríos Turón, Acting Head of the Table Office and Acting Secretary of the Bureau
STEERING COMMITTEE ON LOCAL AND REGIONAL DEMOCRACY
Bureau of the CDLR:
President: Andriy Guk (Ukraine)
Vice-President: Auke van der Goot (Netherlands)
Members: Paul-Henri Philips (Belgium)
Miroslava-Nina Misković (Croatia)
Viktória Zöld-Nagy (Hungary)
Paul Rowsell (United Kingdom)
Secretariat of the CDLR:
- Alfonso Zardi, Head of the Department of Local and Regional Democracy and Good Governance
- Frank Steketee, Administrator, Intergovernmental cooperation
- Vesna Atanasova, Administrator, Intergovernmental cooperation
- Dan Popescu, Head of the Centre of Expertise for Local Government Reform
- Susanne Caarls, Administrator, Strategy for innovation and good governance at local level
Appendix 2
Joint meeting
of the Bureau of the Congress and the Bureau of the CDLR
Date: 14 January 2011
Place: Room 8, Palais de l’Europe
Time: 15.00-17.00
Draft agenda:
1 - Opening of the meeting and welcome by Keith Whitmore, President of the Congress
2 - Adoption of the draft agenda
3 - Congress priorities 2011-2012 [Resolution310(2010)]
4 - CDLR priorities (i.a. Economic crisis – Transfrontier cooperation) [CDLR(2010)26]
5 - Activities and progress of the work of the Chaves group [AG(2011)1] [LetterWhitmore]
6 - Activities of the Centre of Expertise on Local Government Reform
7 - Strategy for Innovation and Good Governance at Local Level
8 - European Local Democracy Week
9 - State of preparation of the Conference of Ministers responsible for local and regional government (Kyiv, Ukraine, November 2011) – Congress’ contribution
10 - Human rights dimension at local and regional level
11 - Other business
12 - Closing of the meeting