Strasbourg, 6 July 2010                                                                        LR-IC(2010)6

EUROPEAN COMMITTEE ON LOCAL AND REGIONAL DEMOCRACY

(CDLR)


COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS ON LOCAL AND REGIONAL

GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS AND CO-OPERATION

(LR-IC)

MEETING REPORT

31 May – 1 June 2010

1.         Opening of the meeting

Mr Alfonso Zardi, Head of the Department of Local and Regional Democracy and Good Governance, opened the meeting on behalf of the Secretary General and welcomed the participants (the list of participants appears in Appendix I).

2.         Election of the Chair and Vice-Chair

Mr Auke van der GOOT (Netherlands) was elected to the Chair and Mrs Viktória ZÖLD-NAGY (Hungary) Vice-Chair.

3.         Adoption of the agenda

The agenda, as set out in Appendix II, was adopted.

4.         Programme of activities of the LR-IC for 2010-2013

-        Draft list of activities

-        Target groups and check list for development of communication action plans

The Committee first discussed the document prepared by the Secretariat (LR-IC(2010)1) in general and then reviewed it point by point. The document included the activities stemming directly from the Utrecht Declaration and activities proposed by member states in the replies to the questionnaire, supplemented with proposals by the Bureau and CDLR.


The Committee reviewed all the activities listed in the document, and agreed on the objectives, impact, time-frame, and rapporteurs responsible for the implementation of the activities. It agreed to use the framework document to describe and monitor the implementation of the activities, and instructed the Secretariat to prepare the updated version of the document incorporating the comments and amendments.

An in-depth debate was held regarding the outputs within the activity on Reducing the complexity and costs of the current system of local and regional government and enhancing its efficiency. In a tour de table members reported on developments in their own country with regard to this issue. Members were invited to send to the Secretariat a summary of their oral presentations, by 14 June 2010. These will be appended to the meeting report (Appendix III).

Agreement was reached on envisaged the output and on the rapporteurs [Mr Lukasz Krysztofiak (Poland) and Mr Auke van der Goot (The Netherlands)]. It was agreed that the aim of the activity would be to develop a reference framework of the features of the systems of local and regional government in member States. A draft for the list of features would be drawn up by the Rapporteurs with the help of the Secretariat and would subsequently be sent to members for approval by e-mail. Once approved, all member States will be invited to provide the necessary information concerning the features of the system of local and regional government of their country. The aim is to have the collection of replies available for consideration by the committee at its next meeting in November 2010.

It was also agreed that this activity should be conducted in collaboration with the LR-FS Committee, which would address in particular the financial aspect of this issue. The Secretariat was asked to ensure the co-ordination.

Finally, the Committee decided to pay particular attention to the communication aspects of this activity.

On the basis of this in-depth review the LR-IC adopted its programme of activities 2010-2013 for the implementation of the Utrecht Agenda. In doing so, it took care to reflect the priority that Ministers had, through their voting at Utrecht, given to the challenges and to identify outputs that meet the highest level of support.

5.         Follow-up to the Kiviniemi report: steps and measures agreed in the Utrecht Declaration

The Committee took note of the steps and measures agreed in the Utrecht Declaration in order to follow-up on the report by Minister Kiviniemi. Particular emphasis was put on the importance of ensuring awareness and co-ordination through appropriate communication inside the ministries responsible for local and regional government, as well as with other ministries, notably the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Committee had concrete proposals for action to make, and agreed that members and the Committee would bear the measures in mind in the conduct of future work. The Committee encouraged members to have contacts with the Permanent representations of their countries during their stay in Strasbourg. 


In the spirit of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Council of Europe and the European Union, the Committee proposed to reinforce links with the High Level Group on Governance and the EU, and to invite a representative of the Belgian EU-Chairmanship to attend the Bureau meeting for exchanging of views on ensuring synergies between the two. This issue will also be raised on 17 June at a preparatory meeting for the High Level Group meeting (30 September – 1 October 2010), by MrPaul-Henri Philips (Belgium), co-ordinator within the Belgian EU Presidency.

6.    Analytical tool for assessing the degree of autonomy of first-tier local        authorities: results of the application

The Committee took note of the state of play as regards the testing phase of the analytical tool, developed by the consultant expert, Prof. Gérard Marcou. The Committee considered that the results from the three countries having completed the test (France, Finland and Hungary) allow the validation of the tool, because these countries considered it useful even if complex. The other countries having volunteered to take part in the test (Austria, Belgium, Netherlands, Spain) reported on the difficulties they had had leading to them not completing the test.

The Committee agreed to propose to the CDLR that the tool be validated and made available for use by any member State willing to do so and that such a State could be given assistance by the Secretariat. It could also be put at the disposal of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities and the Centre for Expertise on Local Government Reform.

7.         Transfrontier co-operation

The Committee discussed jointly the proposals for activities to be implemented as a follow up to the Utrecht Agenda and the additional proposals submitted by the Dutch Delegation (document LR-IC(2010)Inf).Mr Gunter Clev, Director General of MOT (Mission Opérationnelle Transfrontalière) made a presentation of his body’s mission and recent activities, highlighting areas where co-operation with the Council of Europe could be developed.

The Dutch Delegation underlined that more information exchange between member states and regions is necessary in order to know what works (and why) and what doesn't (and why) and that the proposed conference on removing obstacles and promoting good practices could provide an opportunity for doing so.

The Committee agreed that the conference could be jointly organised in the first semester of 2011 by the Netherlands and Hungary, in the framework of the latter country’s EU Presidency in 2011. The Committee set up a working party to prepare the conference, in which Hungary, the Netherlands and the two rapporteurs [Mr Edwin Lefebre (Belgium) and Mrs Manuela González-Carloman (Spain)] agreed to sit. Other members would be welcome to express an interest for participating in this work. The Secretariat was asked to send an invitation in writing to CDLR members (deadline for replies: 30 June). At its meeting in July, the Bureau will fix the composition of the working group in the light of the replies received.


The Committee welcomed the prospect of enhanced co-operation with the MOT, whose experience could be helpful in particular in the work leading to the drafting of the appendices to Protocol No. 3 to the Madrid Outline Convention. It noted that specific proposals would be discussed at its next meeting, on the basis of a work plan to be prepared by the consultant, professor Yves Lejeune.

It took note of the information provided by the Secretariat on the preparation and dissemination of the SWOT analysis of cross border co-operation in the Balkan and Danube area (SWOT 3) following the publication of similar reports on cross border co-operation in Northern (SWOT 2) and Central (SWOT 1) Europe and agreed to have an item on the agenda of its next meeting on how to ensure dissemination and exploitation of this work.

8.        Co-operation and assistance programmes

The Committee was given a presentation on the implementation of co-operation and assistance activities in the field of local and regional government reform in the year 2009, which complemented the information contained in document LR-IC(2010)5.

At the 16th session of their Conference (Utrecht, 16-17 November 2009), the European Ministers responsible for local and regional government agreed to pursue legislative and policy assistance and co-operation programmes as one of the five strands of action in the Council of Europe and instructed the CDLR to “support and encourage” them, “in particular by examining their results regularly and by promoting them among governments, local and regional authorities, their associations as well as with potential partners and donors”.

The Committee took note of the information contained in the document. It confirmed its interest for the “peer review” approach (see also item 9).

9.         Other business

Mr Paulius Skardžius(Lithuania) informed the Committee about the ongoing debate in his country on adoption of the new systems of the direct election of Mayors and the election of the Municipal Councilors. A summary of this information will be sent to the Secretariat for publication on the local democracy website.

The Chair informed the Committee that Iceland is engaged in a reform of the fiscal system of the local government, and it will be the first country that will test the peer review as a new instrument for mutual learning between member States. The peer reviews, as part of the Utrecht Agenda, aims to enable member States to invite their peers from other countries to advise them on the particular issues they are dealing with.  

The Chair invited members also to consider making use of it.

10.         Date of the next meeting

The Committee confirmed the date of the next meeting for 29-30 November 2010.

 


APPENDIX I

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

MEMBERS / MEMBRES

CHAIR / PRESIDENT

Mr Auke van der GOOT, Senior Adviser, Europe and Local and Regional Governance Unit, Directorate-General for Governance and Kingdom Relations, Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations, P.O Box 20011, NL - 2500 EA THE HAGUE

Tel: (31) 70 426 7386; Fax: (31) 70 426 7655; E-mail: [email protected]

AUSTRIA / AUTRICHE

Mrs Martina BÜCHEL-GERMANN, Amt der Vorarlberger Landesregierung / Office of the State Government of Vorarlberg, Römerstrasse 15, A – 6901 Bregenz, Landhaus

Tel: (43) 5574 511 20310 ; Fax: (43) 5574 511 209395

E-Mail: [email protected]

AZERBAIJAN / AZERBAÏDJAN

Mr Habib YUSIFOV, Head of Department on Administrative Supervision, Centre of work with municipalities, Ministry of Justice, 1 Inshaatchilar avenue, 370073 BAKU

Tel: (99412)  596 34 07; Fax: (99412) 596 34 08; E-mail: [email protected]

BELGIUM / BELGIQUE

M. Paul-Henri PHILIPS, Adjoint du Directeur Général, Administration des pouvoirs locaux,  Ministère de la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale, Boulevard du Jardin Botanique, 20, B – 1035 BRUXELLES

Tel : (32) 2 800 32 77; Cel-phone: (32) 499 58 81 05; Fax :(32) 2 800 38 00;

E-mail : [email protected]

Mr Edwin LEFEBRE, Deputy of the Director, Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Flemish Region, Agency for Home Affairs, Boudewijnlaan 30, B - 1000 BRUSSELS

Tel : (32) 2 553 40 16; Fax :(32) 2 553 39 52; E-mail : [email protected]

Mme Laurence GINDT, Attachée, Service Public de Wallonie, Direction générale opérationnelle des Pouvoirs Locaux, Action Sociale et Santé, Résidence Concorde, Rue Van Opré 95, 5100 JAMBES (NAMUR)

Tél: (32) 81 32 37 57; E-mail: [email protected]

M. Xavier KALBUSCH, Ministerium der Deutschsprachigen Gemeinschaft, Gospert 1, 4700 EUPEN

Tél : (32) (0)87 59 63 00 ; Fax : (32) (0)87 55 28 91 ;

E-mail : [email protected]; [email protected]

BULGARIA / BULGARIE

Mr Mihail VASILEV, Senior Expert, General Directorate Strategic Planning of the Regional Development and Administrative Territorial Structure, Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works, 17-19 Sv. Kiril I Metodii Str., 1202 SOFIA

Tel : (359) 2 9405224; Fax: (359) 2 9872517; E-mail: [email protected]


CROATIA / CROATIE

Mrs Miroslava-Nina MIŠKOVIĆ, Head of Independent Division for International Cooperation, Ministry of Public Administration, Maksimirska 63, 10000 ZAGREB

Tel: (385) 1 2357 532; Fax: (385) 1 2357 609; E-mail: [email protected]

CYPRUS / CHYPRE

Mr Antonis ANTONIOU, Administrative officer, Ministry of the Interior, NICOSIA

E-mail: [email protected]

CZECH REPUBLIC/ REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE

Mr Rudolf RYS, Administrative Advisor, Department for Territorial Public Administration, Ministry of Interior of the Czech Republic, nám. Hrdinů 3, 140 21  Praha 4

Tel: +420 974 816 640; fax: +420 974 816 832; E-mail: [email protected]

DENMARK / DANEMARK

                                

Mr Jesper LORENZ GRADERT, Head of Section, Legal Division, Ministry of the Interior and Health, Holmens Kanal 22, 1060 COPENHAGEN K

Tel: (45) 33 92 47 43 E-mail: [email protected]

ESTONIA / ESTONIE

Mr Kaur KAASIK-AASLAV, Adviser to the Local Government and Regional Administration Department, Ministry of the Interior, Pikk 61, TALLINN, 15065

Tel: (372) 612 5136; E-mail:[email protected]

FINLAND / FINLANDE

Apologised for absence / Excusé

GERMANY / ALLEMAGNE

Mrs Gabriele EISEL, Federal Ministry of the Interior, Local Government Affairs, Alt Moabit 101d, D - 10559 BERLIN

Tel: (49) 30 18 681 2353; Fax: (49) 30 18 681 59674; E-mail: [email protected]

HUNGARY / HONGRIE

Mrs Viktória ZÖLD-NAGY, Department of Public Administration Offices, Notaries and State Authority, Ministry of Local Self-Governments, József A. Str. 2 – 4, 1051 - BUDAPEST

Tel: +36 1 999 4828  Fax: +36 1 441-1755 Email: [email protected]

LATVIA / LETTONIE

Ms Anda VECTEVA, Legal Department, Ministry of Regional Development and Local governments, Lacplesa str. 27, LV – 1011 RIGA

Tel : (371) 6777 0382; Fax: (371) 6777 0363; E-mail: [email protected]


LITHUANIA / LITUANIE

Mr Paulius SKARDŽIUS, Director of Public Governance Policy Department, Ministry of the Interior, Ŝventaragio Str. 2, LT - 01510 VILNIUS, LITHUANIA

Tel: (370) 5 271 7071; Fax: (370) 5 271 8915; E-mail: [email protected]

Mr Evaldas GUSTAS, Chancellor of the Ministry of the Interior, Ŝventaragio Str. 2, LT - 01510 VILNIUS, LITHUANIA

Tel: (370) 5 271 7203; Fax: (370) 5 271 8900; E-mail: [email protected]

LUXEMBOURG

Mme Christiane LOUTSCH-JEMMING, Conseiller de Gouvernement 1ère classe, Ministère de l’Intérieur et à la Grande Région, 19 rue Beaumont, L – 1219 Luxembourg

Tél : (352) 247 84615 ;  Fax : (352) 26 20 26 93 ; E-mail : [email protected]

MOLDOVA

Mme Victoria CUJBA, Chef adjoint, Direction des politiques de décentralisation, Chancellerie d’Etat, 1, Piaţa Marii Adunări Naţionale, MD – 2033 CHISINAU

Tel: (373) 22 250 583 / (373) 69480105; E-mail: [email protected]

NETHERLANDS / PAYS-BAS

Mr Tom LEEUWESTEIN, Head of Europe and Local and Regional Governance Unit, Directorate General for Governance and Kingdom Relations, Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations, P.O Box 20011, NL - 2500 EA THE HAGUE

Tel: (31) 70 426 6468; Fax : (31) 70 426 7655 ; E-mail: [email protected]

POLAND / POLOGNE

Mr Lukasz KRYSZTOFIAK, Head of Unit, Unit of Technical Assistance and Projects, Department of Public Administration, Ministry of the Interior and Administration, ul. Wspólna 2/4, PL – 00-505 WARSZAWA

Tel: (48) 22 661 87 38; Fax: (48) 22 661 94 08;

E-mail: [email protected]

RUSSIAN FEDERATION/ FEDERATION DE RUSSIE

Mr Vladimir KASHIN-PADUN, Deputy to the Permanent Representative, Permanent Representation of the Russian Federation to the Council of Europe, 75, allée de la Robertsau,  67000 Strasbourg

Tel. (33) 3 88 24 20 15; Fax (33) 3 88 24 19 74;

E-mail : [email protected]

SLOVAK REPUBLIC / REPUBLIQUE SLOVAQUE

Ms Zuzana BARBORÍKOVÁ, Head of Unit, Department for co-ordination and modernisation of Public administration, Public administration section, Ministry of the Interior of the Slovak Republic, Drieňová 22, 826 86 BRATISLAVA

Tél : (421) 2 4859 2217 ; Fax: (421) 2 4333 46 74;

E-mail: [email protected]

SLOVENIA / SLOVENIE

Mr Andrej ČOKERT, Office for Local Self-Government and Regional Policy, Slovenska cesta 54, 1501 LJUBLJANA, Slovenia

Tel: + 386 1 434 15 28; Fax: + 386 1 43 41 538; e-mail: [email protected]

SPAIN / ESPAGNE

Mme Manuela GONZÁLEZ-CARLOMAN, Conseiller Technique de la Sous-direction Générale des Relations de collaboration avec les Communautés Autonomes, Direction Générale de la Coopération Régionale, Santa Engracia, 7, E - 28071 MADRID

Tel: (34) 91 273 45 88/45 85; Fax: (34) 91 273 46 10; E-mail: [email protected]

SWEDEN / SUEDE

Mr Emil HÖGBERG, Ministry of Finance, Division for Local Government Affairs, SE – 103 33 STOCKHOLM

Tel: (46) 8 4052014; E-mail: [email protected]

SWITZERLAND / SUISSE

M. Fabrizio TASCHETTA, Chef Suppléant de la Section des Frontières et du Droit de voisinage, Direction du Droit international public, Département fédéral des Affaires étrangères, Bundeshaus Nord, CH-3003 BERNE

Tel. : 41 31 322 30 54; Fax : 41 31 323 16 47; Email : [email protected]

TURKEY / TURQUIE

Dr Ilker HAKTANKAÇMAZ, Head of the Section for International Affairs, General Directorate for Local Authorities, Ministry of the interior, Republic of Turkey, Içişleri Bakanliği, Mahalli Idareler Genel Müdürlügü– 06644 ANKARA

Tel: +90 312 425 72 14; Fax: +90 312 418 72 08;

E-mail: [email protected]

UNITED KINGDOM / ROYAUME-UNI

Mr Paul ROWSELL, Deputy Director, Democracy and Local Governance, Department for Communities and Local Government, 3/J1, Eland House, Bressenden Place, LONDON SW1E 5DU, GB

Tel: (44) 303 44 42568; E-mail: [email protected]

Ms Victoria JONES, Team Leader, European and International Democracy and Local Governance, Department for Communities and Local Government, 3/J1, Eland House, Bressenden Place, LONDON SW1E 5DU, GB

Tel: (44) 303 44 42585; E-mail: [email protected]

PARTICIPANTS

PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY / ASSEMBLEE PARLEMENTAIRE

M. Jérémie ZALOSZYC, Co-Secretary / Co-Secrétaire - Committee of the Environment, Agriculture and Local and Regional Affairs / Commission de l’environnement, de l’agriculture et des questions territoriales

E-mail: [email protected]


CONGRESS OF LOCAL AND REGIONAL AUTHORITIES OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE / CONGRES DES POUVOIRS LOCAUX ET REGIONAUX DU CONSEIL DE L’EUROPE

Mr Andreas KIEFER, Secretary General / Secrétaire Général

Tel : +33 (0)3 88 41 22 48; Fax : +33 (0)3 88 41 27 51;

E-mail : [email protected]

Ms Lilit NIKOGHOSYAN, Co-Secretary of the Institutional Committee / Co-Secrétaire de la Commission institutionnelle

Tel: (33) 3.88.41.35.04; Fax: (33) 3.88.41.27.51;  E-mail: [email protected]

OTHER PARTICIPANT / AUTRE PARTICIPANT

HOLY-SEE / SAINT-SIEGE

Apologised for absence / Excusé

BENELUX UNION/UNION BENELUX

Mr Hans MOOREN, Administrateur, Union Benelux, Rue de la Régence 39, 1000 Bruxelles

Tel: 32-2-519 38 43; E-mail: [email protected]

OBSERVERS / OBSERVATEURS

ASSEMBLY OF EUROPEAN REGIONS (AER) / ASSEMBLEE DES REGIONS D'EUROPE (ARE)

Mrs Agnès CICCARONE, Senior Policy Coordinator, Standing Committee on Institutional Affairs, Assembly of Europe Regions, 6 rue Oberlin, 67000 STRASBOURG

Tél: 33 3 88 22 74 32; E-mail: [email protected]

M. le Professeur Charles RICQ, Directeur du Centre d'Observation Européen des Régions (COEUR), Professeur à l’Université de Genève, Chemin de la Renardière, CH - 1272 GENOLIER (Genève)

Tel: (41) 22 366 40 66; Fax: (41) 22 366 40 65; E-mail: [email protected]

COUNCIL OF EUROPEAN MUNICIPALITIES AND REGIONS (CEMR) / CONSEIL DES COMMUNES ET REGIONS D’EUROPE (CCRE)

Mr Boris TONHAUSER, Policy Officer, Council of European Municipalities and Regions, Square de Meeûs, 1, B – 1000 BRUXELLES

Tel: (32) 2 500 05 39 ; Fax: (32) 2 511 09 49; E-mail : [email protected]

ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT / ORGANISATION POUR LA COOPERATION ET LE DEVELOPPEMENT ECONOMIQUES

Apologised for absence / excusé

OTHER / AUTRE

Dr. Hans-Günther CLEV, Directeur Général, Mission Opérationnelle Transfrontalière, 38 rue des Bourdonnais, 75001 PARIS

Tél : (33) 1 55 80 56 89 ; E-mail : [email protected]


SECRETARIAT

Mr Childerik SCHAAPVELD, Director of Democratic Institutions/ Directeur des institutions démocratiques, Directorate General of Democracy and Political Affairs / Direction générale de la démocratie et des affaires politiques

Tel: +33 (0)3 88 41 20 60; Fax: +33 (0)3 88 41 27 84;

E-mail: [email protected]

Mr Alfonso ZARDI, Head of the Department of Local and Regional Democracy and Good Governance / Chef du Service de la démocratie locale et régionale et de la bonne gouvernance - Directotrate of Democratic Institutions/ Direction des institutions démocratiques, Directorate General of Democracy and Political Affairs / Direction générale de la démocratie et des affaires politiques

Tel : +33 (0)3 88 41 39 06; Fax : +33 (0)3 88 41 27 84; E-mail : [email protected]

Mr Frank STEKETEE, Administrator / Administrateur – Directorate of Democratic Institutions/ Direction des institutions démocratiques, Directorate General of Democracy and Political Affairs / Direction générale de la démocratie et des affaires politiques

Tel: +33 (0)3 88 41 39 61; Fax: +33 (0)3 88 41 27 84; E-mail: [email protected]

Mrs Vesna ATANASOVA, Administrator / Administratrice – Directorate of Democratic Institutions/ Direction des institutions démocratiques, Directorate General of Democracy and Political Affairs / Direction générale de la démocratie et des affaires politiques

Tel: +33 (0)3 88 41 31 68; Fax: +33 (0)3 88 41 27 84;

E-mail: [email protected]

Ms Severina SPASSOVA, Directorate of Democratic Institutions / Direction des institutions démocratiques, Directorate General of Democracy and Political Affairs / Direction générale de la démocratie et des affaires politiques

Tel: +33 (0)3 90 21 52 72; Fax : +33 (0)3 88 41 27 84;

E-mail : [email protected]


APPENDIX II

AGENDA

                                                                          

1.

Opening of the meeting by the Secretariat

2.

Election of the Chair and the Vice-Chair

3.

Adoption of the agenda

[LR-IC(2010)OJ1 rev.]

4.

Programme of activities of the LR-IC for 2010-2013:

-      Draft list of activities

-      Target groups and check list for

development of communication actions plans

[LR-IC(2010)1]

[LR-IC(2010)2]

5.

Follow-up to the Kiviniemi report: steps and measures

agreed in the Utrecht Declaration

[LR-IC(2010)3]

6.

 

Analytical tool for assessing the degree of autonomy of

first-tier local authorities: results of testing

[LR-IC(2010)4]

7.

Transfrontier co-operation

[LR-IC(2010)Inf]

8.

Co-operation and assistance programmes

[LR-IC(2010)5]

9.

Other business

10.

Date of the next meeting (29-30 November 2010)


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Pages

AUSTRIA……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….   13

BELGIUM (REGION OF BRUXELLES-CAPITALE)……………………………………………………………..   16

BELGIUM (FLEMISH REGION)………………………………………………………………........................  17

BELGIUM (WALLOON REGION)……………………………………………………………………………………….   21

CZECH REPUBLIC……………………………………………………………………………………………………………    25

ESTONIA………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….    26

GERMANY………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..    28

LATVIA………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…    29

LITHUANIA………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….    30

LUXEMBOURG…………………………………………………………………………………...........................    31

NETHERLANDS………………………………………………………………….…………………………………….……..    33

SLOVAK REPUBLIC………………………………………………………………………………………………….….…     44

SPAIN……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……..    45

TURKEY………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……….    46


APPENDIX III

(bi-lingual / bilingue)

AUSTRIA / AUTRICHE

Amt der NÖ Landesregierung

Auf das Schreiben vom 4. Juni 2010 teilt das Amt der Wiener Landesregierung Folgendes mit:

Ganz grundsätzlich lässt sich feststellen, dass die Organisationsstruktur des Landes bzw. der Gemeinde Wien im Vergleich zum Ministerien-System des Bundes einige Effizienzvorteile aufweist, da zentrale Dienste wie z. B. EDV, Buchhaltung, Personalverrechnung oder der Einkauf von zentralen Stellen für den kompletten Magistrat wahrgenommen werden.

Bereits 1998 wurde in Wien gestützt auf die Grundsätze des New Public Managements ein tiefgreifender Strukturwandel eingeleitet, um den Magistrat zu einem output- bzw. wirkungsorientierten Dienstleistungskonzern für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger weiterzuentwickeln. Nach Abschluss einer umfassenden Organisationsanalyse kam es nicht nur zu umfassenden Änderungen in der Organisation, sondern auch bei der Budgetierung. Die sogenannte Globalbudgetierung führte dazu, dass alle Ausgaben, also auch der Sach- und Personalaufwand zur Gänze den neuen Geschäftsgruppen-Ansätzen zugeordnet wurden. Diese erhöhte Budgetverantwortung und somit auch höhere Selbstbestimmungsmöglichkeit führte zu einem neuen Kostenbewusstsein. Um gleichzeitig auch entsprechende Anreize zur Stabilisierung des Personalaufwandes zu setzen, wurde den Geschäftsgruppen des Magistrats auch die Gelegenheit eröffnet, Einsparungen beim Aktiv-Personalaufwand für Anschaffungen im Rahmen des Sachaufwandes heranzuziehen. Als wesentlich für die Akzeptanz der Globalbudgetierung erwies sich auch die Chance allfällige Minderausgaben einer dem jeweiligen Geschäftsgruppen-Ansatz zugeordneten Rücklage zuzuführen.

Sowohl die Einführung als auch der Vollzug von Globalbudgets setzen ein umfassendes EDV-gestütztes Finanzinformationssystem voraus, das auch Controllinginstrumente beinhaltet, um Abweichungen identifizieren und geeignet darauf reagieren zu können. Beim Land bzw. der Gemeinde Wien wird daher laufend ein zentrales Budgetcontrolling durchgeführt.

Mit diesen Maßnahmen einer umfassenden dezentralen Ressourcenverantwortung wurde dem Ziel einer optimalen und wirtschaftlichen Leistungserbringung für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger jedenfalls ein gutes Stück nähergekommen.


Amt der Steiermärkischen Landesregierung

Im Bericht der gemeinsamen Ländervertreterin über die Tagung des Expertenausschusses für lokale und regionale Regierungsinstitutionen und Zusammenarbeit des Europarates vom 31. Mai und 1. Juni, werden die Länder bzw. der Städte- und der Gemeindebund gebeten, zu den Maßnahmen zur Kostenreduktion und Effizienzsteigerungen auf der regionalen bzw. lokalen Ebene Stellung zu nehmen bzw. Vorschläge zu unterbreiten.

Vom Land Steiermark wird in diesem Zusammenhang mit Zustimmung des landesamtsdirektors folgende Stellungnahme abgegeben:

Auf landespolitischer Ebene der Steiermark wurde bereits vor der Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise erkannt, dass die Entwicklungen innerhalb und außerhalb des Landes eine Neuorientierung und Neuorganisation der steirischen Regional- und Gemeindeentwicklung erforderlich machen. Aus diesem Grund wurde Anfang 2006 von Landeshauptmann Voves und Landeshauptmann-Stellvertreter Schützenhöfer das Projekt Regionext initiiert, welches nachfolgend kurz beschrieben wird. Nachdem Frau Dr. Büchel in einem Gespräch um eine kurze Stellungnahme ersucht hat, wird die Beschreibung bewusst kurz  gehalten, für weiterführende Informationen darf deshalb auf die Homepage des Projektes verwiesen werden (www.raumplanung.steiermark.at).

Auf Basis von Novellierungen des Steiermärkischen Raumordnungsgesetzes sowie der

Gemeindeordnung erfolgt die Umsetzung von Regionext auf folgenden Ebenen:

Kleinregionen als Gemeindekooperationen

Regionen mit meist mehreren politischen Bezirken

Auf Basis der novellierten Gemeindeordnung bilden zumindest 4 Gemeinden mit mindestens 3.000 Einwohnern auf freiwilliger Basis Kleinregionen. Von den Kleinregionen wird ein Kleinregionales Entwicklungskonzept“ (KEK) erstellt, darin wird von den Gemeinden definiert, welche kommunalen Aufgaben in Hinkunft gemeinsam wahrgenommen werden. Ziel ist es demnach auf Basis eines 2

standardisierten und systematischen Prozesses sinnvolle interkommunale Kooperationen umzusetzen und so einen Beitrag zur Qualitätssteigerung und finanziellen Entlastung der Gemeindehaushalte zu leisten. Zur Koordination der Umsetzung der Vorgaben, zur politischen Vertretung und zur Beschlussfassung wurden eigene Gremien eingerichtet:

In der Kleinregionsversammlung sind die BürgermeisterInnen und GemeinderätInnen aller Gemeinden der Kleinregion stimmberechtigt vertreten. Wesentlichste Aufgabe ist die

Beschlussfassung des Kleinregionalen Entwicklungskonzepts mit den abgestimmten

gemeinsamen kommunalen Aufgaben.

Der Kleinregionsvorstand bildet das Arbeitsgremium der Kleinregion, erarbeitet den Entwurf des Kleinregionalen Entwicklungskonzeptes und sorgt für die Koordination und Umsetzung und die Weiterentwicklung des Kleinregionalen Entwicklungskonzeptes.

Neben der Kleinregionsebene ist nach einer Novelle des Raumordnungsgesetzes die

Schwerpunktaufgabe der regionalen Ebene die Entwicklung von regionalpolitischen Zielsetzungen und Projekten. Es werden regionale Entwicklungsleitbilder ausgearbeitet, die die gemeinsame strategische Ausrichtung mit den regionalen Leitthemen enthalten. Die Regionalen Leitbilder werden durch Leitprojekte umgesetzt. In der Steiermark wurden auf Basis eines ebenfalls freiwilligen Findungsprozesses 7 Regionen festgelegt. Analog zur Kleinregionsebene wurde auch auf strategischer Ebene Gremien eingerichtet:

In Regionalversammlungen stimmberechtigte Mitglieder sind die BürgermeisterInnen der in der Region liegenden Gemeinden sowie Landtags- und Nationalratsabgeordnete mit Hauptwohnsitz in dieser Region.

Der Regionalvorstand erarbeitet (mit externer Unterstützung) den Entwurf des Regionalen Entwicklungsleitbildes und legt diesen der Regionalversammlung zur Beschlussfassung vor. Wesentlich ist auch die Mitwirkung an der Umsetzung von Zielen und Maßnahmen des Regionalen Entwicklungsleitbildes und des Regionalen Entwicklungsprogramms sowie die Definition von Regionalen (Leit-)Projekten.

Im Zuge der Umsetzung der Initiative Regionext nehmen sogenannte „Regionalmanagements“ eine wichtige Netzwerk- und Managementfunktion wahr und übernehmen als Geschäftsstellen der jeweiligen Regionalversammlungen und Regionalvorstände die Geschäftsführung der regionalen Gremien und unterstützen die Gemeinden im Rahmen der Kleinregionsbildung und Umsetzung der interkommunalen Zusammenarbeit. Die Unterstützung durch intermediäre Organisationen wie dem Regionalmanagement ist ein wesentlicher Erfolgsfaktor bei der interkommunalen und regionalen Zusammenarbeit.

Gemeindekooperationen und Zusammenarbeit in Regionen leisten nach Erfahrung der Landes Steiermark einen wesentlichen Beitrag zur Kostenreduktion und Effizienzsteigerung und werden von der Steiermärkischen Landesregierung auch in Zukunft forciert werden. Um die Zusammenarbeit von Kommunen noch stärker zu forcieren sollten künftig stärkere Anreize für Gemeindekooperationen im Rahmen des Finanzausgleichgesetzes gesetzt werden.

X

Am der Oö Landesregierung

Zur Frage betreffend Kostenreduktion und Effizienzsteigerung auf regionaler und lokaler Ebene und damit im Zusammenhang, ob Gemeindezusammenschlüsse angedacht sind, darf zunächst auf die eindeutige politische Position Oberösterreichs hingewiesen werden.

Ergänzend ist anzumerken, dass seit geraumer Zeit und mit zunehmender Intensität Kooperationen zwischen Gemeinden empfohlen und propagiert werden, so insbesondere in Form von Verwaltungsgemeinschaften gemäß § 13 der Oö. Gemeindeordnung 1990 oder in Form von Gemeindeverbänden gemäß dem Oö. Gemeindeverbändegesetz. In Teilbereichen erfolgt schon derzeit die Gewährung von Landesgeldern erst nach erfolgter Prüfung der Möglichkeit von Kooperationen. Die Gemeinden sind in diesem Sinn gefordert und verpflichtet, bei anstehenden Projekten die Möglichkeit von Kooperationen mit benachbarten Gemeinden eingehend zu prüfen.


BELGIQUE (REGION DE BRUXELLES-CAPITALE) /

BELGIUM (REGION OF BRUXELLES-CAPITALE)

En réponse à votre mail, je vous rappelle - en substance - le contenu de mon intervention pour la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale :

Voici en quelques mots les particularités de la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale dans ce secteur. Je désire aussi ajouter que la mutualisation de certaines activités n'est pas exclue (centrale d'achats, service central de travaux publics, organisme de recrutement du personnel...) mais sans que ces propositions n'aient abouti à ce jour.

Un dernier point concerne l'intercommunalisation "formelle" : cet outil n'est utilisé en Région de Bruxelles-Capitale que pour la gestion de l'eau au sens large (production, adduction et distribution, d'une part, et gestion des égouts et du traitement des eaux usées, d'autre part).


BELGIQUE (REGION FLAMANDE) /

BELGIUM (FLEMISH REGION)

Main points of the reform of local and regional government in Flanders

(2009-2014)

Elections for the Flemish Parliament were held on 7 June 2009, at the same time as elections for the European Parliament. An agreement for a coalition government for the legislative period 2009-2014 was reached on 11 July 2009.

A policy memorandum on Domestic Governance for this period 2009-2014 was prepared by the Administration, namely the Agency for Home Affairs.

1. 2009-2014 coalition agreement[1]

The main points of the coalition agreement as regards the local governments are the following:

1.1. Administrative simplification

The introduction of the Municipal Decree and the Provincial Decree is being monitored closely so that adjustments and simplifications can be made where necessary.

1.2. Less administrative confusion thanks to internal state reform

In the administrative landscape, there are several different layers of administration and bodies which have decision-making powers for the same policy matters. A regrouping of competences is thus necessary. Per policy sector a review will be made of how the current fragmentation of competences across different layers of the administration can be adapted in order to arrive at more homogeneous packages and key tasks per administrative layer. This “internal state reform” should be started up per policy sector and entail the broad involvement of all the administrative levels. In particular, the provincial administrative level, the intermunicipal cooperative ventures, the deconcentrated and other intermediary forms of administration will be examined for combinations of policy or niche policies which have developed over time.

The aim is to bring government closer to the citizen. A bottom-up approach is opted for. The emphasis in this approach is on strong municipalities. They will be given more competences. The emphasis is on the municipalities on the one hand, and on Flanders on the other hand. A simplification of the intervening administrative layers is necessary to achieve a more efficient and more effective operation of the authorities.

The number of provincial councillors will be reduced to a maximum of 72 councillors in provinces with more than one million inhabitants and to a maximum of 63 councillors in provinces with fewer than one million inhabitants.

The Flemish Government encourages voluntary merges of municipalities and will provide support, amongst other things, with a one-off subsidy bonus;

The voluntary merge of a municipality and the OCMW or public social welfare centre will be made possible by decree. The Flemish government will provide support for this, amongst other things with a one-off subsidy bonus.

In the context of a reduction in planning costs, a plan for the legislative period will be drawn up which allows for output control and benchmarking. The different plans which are currently drawn up by the local and provincial governments (culture policy plan, youth policy plan, sports policy plan, environmental policy plan, etc.) will be eliminated and be integrated in this multiannual plan.

1.3. Partnership with strong local governments

During this legislative period the Flemish Government will work hard on improving its own administrative organisation. Starting points include: the subsidiarity principle, the strengthening of the administrative power of all local governments, a drastic simplification of the many intermediary structures and bodies, the refinancing of cities and municipalities, a strong partnership between Flanders and the provinces and the local administrations on the basis of equality.

2. 2009-2014 Policy Memorandum on Domestic Governance[2]

The strategic objectives of the policy memorandum as regards Domestic Governance are as follows:

  1. Work on an internal state reform;
  2. Development of a fully-fledged partnership which extends beyond policy areas and levels of government;
  3. Arrive at a higher administrative efficiency by using electronic resources and data exchange between Flanders, the provinces and the local governments;
  4. Strive to create strong and responsible local governments;
  5. An efficient organisation of local and provincial elections in 2012;
  6. Domestic governance in a European and international perspective.

2.1. Work on internal state reform

See point 1.2.

2.2. A fully-fledged partnership which extends beyond policy areas and levels of government

Concomitantly with the simplification of the administrative landscape the Flemish Government will rationalise the policy processes and audits of the Flemish public services, aligning them with the local governments and the provinces.

2.3. Arriving at increased administrative efficiency through ICT use, data sharing and process management between Flanders, the local governments and provinces

Increased efficiency can be achieved by making optimum use of ICT at various policy levels.

This can be achieved first and foremost by extensive data sharing between the Flemish Government, the local governments and the provinces. The final objective has to be that data that are available and known at government level have to be broadly accessible and do not have to be requested time and again from citizens, enterprises and the administrations. In that same train of thought the mutual electronic flow of information between local governments, provinces and the Flemish Government can be improved.

The following measures will be taken among others:

-       examine how modern ICT tools can be optimally used to harmonise the policy processes among the various policy levels;

-       review how ICT can be used to dispatch the minutes of the municipal council and to give council members access to dossiers.

2.4. Strive to create strong and responsible local governments

Flanders wishes to create a framework, within its competences, for local governments, which will enable them to enforce a strong policy. Local governments have to be encouraged to take their responsibility within this frame in order to arrive at the best possible public service. Three domains are crucial to achieve this: organic legislation, the financial frame and personnel policy.

In spite of the economic/financial crisis and the required savings (Flanders will save EUR 2 billion on a budget of EUR 24 billion) the Municipal Fund will not be the subject of savings. It will instead benefit from 3.5% more resources in spite of a low inflation and the fact that the wages of municipal personnel will not be increased. The increase is not once-off, but annual.

2.5. An efficient organisation of local and provincial elections in 2012

Integrated Flemish electoral laws will be created, in which the applicable regulations for local and provincial elections will be gathered in a clear and coherent manner.

2.6. Domestic governance in a European and international perspective

Belgium will preside over the European Union in the second half of 2010. The administrations are thus actively contributing to initiatives that are being taken in this frame, on condition that Flanders can help shape these initiatives in a balanced manner, together with the other regions and on condition of a clear Flemish representation.

Transfrontier cooperation is important for the local authorities. An active role for the Agency of Home Affairs in international organisations where the subject of transfrontier cooperation is treated (Council of Europe, Benelux Union and European Union) is required.

At the moment there are two EGTCs in which the Flemish Government and the Flemish local governments are involved. Both pertain to the French/Flemish border. The former is the EGTC Eurometropole Lille/Kortrijk/Doornik, which was the first EGTC to be established in the European Union. The second EGCT, i.e., the EGCT West Flanders/Flanders-Dunkirk/ Côte d’Opale was established on 3 April 2009.

Because these EGTCs are experiencing some growing pains, they need to be evaluated. The evaluation has to lead to a further improvement of these relationships with a view to trans-frontier co-operation in the future.

A new Benelux tool for trans-frontier co-operation, which is to be called the Benelux Treaty on Trans-Frontier Territorial Cooperation, is currently being prepared. This new treaty will replace the Benelux Convention on Trans-frontier Co-operation between territorial communities or authorities, signed on 12 September 1986 in Brussels.

The object of the Benelux Treaty on Trans-Frontier Territorial Cooperation among others comprises the following new elements with regard to the current Benelux Agreement:

-          The scope of the Treaty is no longer limited to local governments, but also encompasses central and regional governments, as well as semi-public organisations such as universities and hospitals, which can make use of it. Thus there is margin for the so-called multilevel governance approach in addition to the existing forms of Euregional and local cooperation;

-          The Treaty can be applied to any cooperation on the external borders of the  three Benelux countries (Germany, France and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland);

-          The current three forms of cooperation (public body, administrative agreement and the common body) are maintained. The public body shall be named Benelux Group Territorial Cooperation (BGTC) and can opt to use the facility to make decisions which are directly binding for citizens and others, as is the case now.  New is that the BGTC can establish one or more operational headquarters in the territory of the parties involved in the cooperation through participation of a government, institution or partnership. In contrast to an EGTC prior authorisation for the creation of a BGTC is not required.

Currently work is also ongoing to map the bottlenecks that are an obstacle for trans-frontier co-operation between Belgium/Flanders and the Netherlands. This inventory highlights the bottlenecks and provides an insight into which governments are competent for a given issue. The bottlenecks can be found at all administrative levels, both at European and central/national/regional and provincial and municipal level.


BELGIQUE (REGION WALLONNE) /

BELGIUM (WALLOON REGION)

Réduction de la complexité et des coûts de l’organisation actuelle des collectivités locales et régionales et augmentation de son efficacité.

Voici quelques éléments.

1.    Synergie Communes / CPAS

En Belgique, un CPAS ou Centre Public d’Action Sociale, est un établissement public qui dessert chaque commune.  Il a pour mission d’assurer l’aide sociale pour permettre à chacun de mener une vie conforme à la dignité humaine.

4.4. Synergies communes - CPAS - entités paralocales

(Pg 253 "Avec le CPAS, la commune dispose d’un outil social institutionnel. Plusieurs mesures ont été adoptées au cours de cette législature pour renforcer les liens entre ces deux structures (présence du président du CPAS au collège communal, réunions communes des deux conseils…). ")

(Pg 253 "Dans un souci d’efficacité, le Gouvernement définira un cadre légal qui, à l’exception de l’aide sociale directe aux personnes, forcera le rapprochement effectif des services (mise en commun rationnelle au niveau des services du personnel ou des travaux, des ressources informatiques, de la téléphonie, de la gestion des bâtiments et du matériel, des assurances, des finances, de la perception des recettes…) et la mise en place de guichet unique (commune-CPAS). Dans le même sens, le Gouvernement mettra en œuvre la possibilité récemment offerte par le Code que le CPAS et la commune puissent avoir le même receveur")

(Pg 254 "Un travail similaire devra également être réalisé à l’égard des autres entités paralocales (régies, association chapitre XII et asbl)")

(Pg 254 "Par ailleurs, le Gouvernement mènera, dans le respect de la diversité des convictions religieuses et philosophiques reconnues, une large concertation avec l’ensemble des acteurs intéressés afin d’aboutir à un cadre décretal et réglementaire modernisé, transparent et simplifié pour les établissements des cultes ainsi que les établissements et organisations laïques")


2.    Réforme des provinces

Réformer les provinces pour renforcer leur efficacité et pour organiser la supracommunalité

(Pg 255 "Afin de simplifier le paysage institutionnel situé entre la Région et la commune, le Gouvernement réformera l’institution provinciale pour la faire évoluer, à terme et après révision de la Constitution, en communauté de territoires adaptée comme entité de gestion des intérêts supra-communaux, de pilotage politique des intercommunales, de soutien aux politiques communales et de déconcentration de missions régionales et communautaires dans le cadre des stratégies établies par la Région et/ou les Communautés")

(Pg 255 "Cette réforme sera effectuée en deux étapes. Elle s’effectuera sans impact négatif sur le personnel actuellement en place et ne pourra diminuer les services offerts ou les missions auxquelles les institutions publiques répondent")

(Pg 255 "Un effort a déjà été entrepris pour moderniser le fonctionnement de l’institution provinciale : motion de méfiance, présidence du collège provincial par un député provincial, revalorisation du rôle de conseiller provincial,… Toutefois, dans un souci d’efficacité et de rationalité, il est indispensable de poursuivre les réformes")

(Pg 255 "Dans une première étape conclue au plus tard d’ici 2011 en vue d’une mise en œuvre effective et complète dès la prochaine législature provinciale, le Gouvernement opérera un réaménagement des compétences provinciales guidé par les principes de cohérence, de subsidiarité et d’efficacité. Pour le Gouvernement, les provinces doivent concentrer leur action dans les domaines où une action à l’échelle supra-communale présente une plus value")

(Pg 255 "Pour y parvenir, les gouvernements développeront, dans un premier temps, une politique active de partenariat en ce qui concerne les politiques régionales et/ou communautaires. Ils proposeront que chaque province définisse un nombre limité d’« axes prioritaires » correspondant aux domaines dans lesquels leur valeur ajoutée est la plus grande. Ces axes prioritaires, négociés avec la Région et les Communautés, le cas échéant après une consultation des communes, seront déclinés dans un plan stratégique provincial en une série de missions et d’objectifs variables en fonction des spécificités de chaque province et, le cas échéant, des bassins de vie qui la composent. Le fonds des provinces sera adapté en fonction de la réalisation de ces objectifs")

(Pg 256 "Dans cette optique et dès cette première étape, l’action des provinces sera repensée notamment en soutien des communes. De nombreuses communes ne disposent en effet pas des moyens financiers et humains suffisants pour accomplir certaines missions (lutte contre les incivilités, information et conseil en matière d’énergie, rédaction de cahiers des charges, entretien du Ravel, services techniques, soutien à l’élaboration de dossiers européens,…). Sur base du principe de solidarité territoriale, les communes qui le souhaitent pourront solliciter la collaboration de la province, au bénéfice du citoyen et permettant de réaliser des économies d’échelle")

(Pg 256 "Dans ce même souci d’efficacité, le Gouvernement propose que les compétences provinciales où les Communautés, la Région ou les communes peuvent intervenir de façon plus efficace soient abandonnées par les provinces et confiées à ces Communautés, Région ou communes. C’est le cas, par exemple, du logement, de la gestion des voiries, des relations internationales (autres que celles entre pouvoirs locaux européens), de l’énergie, du patrimoine, de leur compétence juridictionnelle en matière de contentieux électoral ou de l’animation économique. Ces transferts de compétences s’effectueront sans impact négatif sur le personnel actuellement en place")

(Pg 256 "Le fonds des provinces sera réduit à concurrence des moyens correspondant aux compétences abandonnées")

(Pg 256 "Ce recentrage des compétences provinciales sur un nombre restreint de prérogatives conduira en 2012, sans altérer la représentation proportionnelle et tenant compte du nombre d’habitants, à une diminution d’un tiers du nombre des conseillers provinciaux. A cette même échéance, le nombre global de députés provinciaux sera également réduit d’un tiers tenant compte du nombre d’habitants et de la superficie du territoire. Ainsi, le nombre de membres d’un collège provincial sera déterminé de la manière suivante : deux députés pour chaque province auxquels s’ajoute un député par tranche entamée de 500.000 habitants, auquel s’ajoute un député pour les provinces dont la superficie est supérieure à 4.000 km2")

(Pg 256 "De la même manière, cette réforme entrainera naturellement une diminution du nombre et une simplification des structures para-provinciales (asbl et régies). Le Gouvernement instaurera la représentation proportionnelle de tous les partis démocratiques dans les conseils d’administration des structures restantes, avec une représentation minimale de chaque groupe démocratique")

(Pg 256 "Une attention particulière sera également portée sur la réglementation et la limitation des dépenses de fonctionnement du conseil et du collège provincial")

(Pg 256 "Parallèlement à cette première étape, le Gouvernement étudiera la mise en œuvre de la deuxième qui suppose une révision de la Constitution, visant à transformer l’institution provinciale en communauté de territoires à l’échelle de bassins de vie en qualité d’organe politique et ayant une triple mission : la déconcentration des politiques régionales ou communautaires, la gestion de l’intérêt supralocal en ce compris le pilotage politique des intercommunales correspondant à son ressort territorial et enfin le soutien aux politiques communales")

(Pg 257 "Les organes de la communauté de territoires seront : une assemblée qui délibère en public et composée d’élus communaux sur base des principes de représentation minimale et de représentation proportionnelle ; un collège exécutif responsable devant l’assemblée")

(Pg 257 "Les intercommunales correspondant à l’échelle des bassins de vie seront appelées à évoluer en agences techniques d’exécution des orientations politiques de la communauté de territoires")

(Pg 257 " réaliser un cadastre des attributions subsistantes des provinces après la conclusion de la première étape ")

(Pg 257 " mener une réflexion sur le maillage territorial de la Région wallonne et sur la taille critique des communautés de territoires à créer, sur base de critères régionaux et en consultant les communes notamment quant la communauté de territoires qu’elles souhaitent intégrer ")

(Pg 257 " formuler des propositions visant à opérationnaliser la transformation des provinces en communautés de territoires, dans le respect des principes de cohérence, de responsabilité et d’efficacité dans l’exercice des missions, et de renforcement de la transparence et du contrôle démocratique")

(Pg 257 "Le Gouvernement de la Communauté germanophone sera consulté quant à la situation des communes de la région de langue allemande dans la mise en œuvre de cette seconde étape")

(Pg 257 "Dans l’attente de la réalisation de cette seconde étape et de la transformation des provinces en communautés de territoires et afin de mieux mettre en œuvre des projets communs répondant aux besoins de plusieurs communes, le Gouvernement souhaite encourager des nouvelles formes de collaboration entre communes, constituées sur base volontaire, afin de maximiser, au profit de toute la Wallonie, les effets de pôle que représentent les territoires. Les communes pourront ainsi conclure ensemble un « contrat de développement durable » qui identifiera les moyens, projets et actions prioritaires à mettre en œuvre pour rencontrer les réalités urbaines, rurales ou semi-rurales qui leur sont spécifiques")


CZECH REPUBLIC / REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE

Report on indicators for complexity and costs of the current system of local and regional government and enhancing its efficiency

There are two main themes:

1) Implementation of e-government to the territory

There are some financial incentives (european money) for municipalities to decide (in their own scope of competencies) to take part on goverment policy. Establishing of so called Czech POINTS. Czech POINT is an acronym Czech POINT = Czech Posting and Verification Information National Terminal.. Czech POINT is a network of assisted public administration centres where every citizen can obtain all the information on the data kept on him or her by the state in its central registers.

• Verified copies of entries

– in the Land Registry

– in the Companies´Registry

– in the Trade Licensing Registry

– in the Criminal Registry

• Receiving applications for trade registration (licensing process)

– Filing terminal

• Administrative bodies have access to Criminal Records

– in some administrative cases is no need for citizens to have their document from Criminal Registry

• Unified Identity Space

– integration with ePUSA and local government agendas

• Copies of entries in the Register of Penalty Points of Drivers

• Announcements of events recordable in the Register of Births, Deaths and Marriages

• Preparation for the force of eGA

– Verification terminal, conversion of documents.

There is a space for government actions in the future.

2) Problems of small municipalities

Government Decree No. 758 from 15th June 2009 to „Conclusions of the Study on Idetification of Competencies Burdening Performance of Public Administration with Special Attention to Small Municipalities“ is the latest decree about government policy in this field. Small municipalities are often unable to execute some competencies in their delegated scope of competence. There is an extraordinary solution for such situation – a possibility to make a contract governed by public law with other (very often bigger) municipality, which will afterwards execute that competence. Too much contracts governed by public law means, that there is a change of some Acts of Law needed. There was a surwey on the niveau of central state administration which tasks should very small municipalities really execute. Reducing of costs and creating of better environment for small municipalities was the main aim of this efforts. The only solution is to shift some competencies from the delegated scope of competence to bigger municipalities, to so called municipalities with extended powers.

There is no discussion on reducing of number of municipalites.


ESTONIA / ESTONIE

Contracting out LG services

LGs are responsible of the service delivery - even in the case the provision of the service has been contracted out to a private or third sector, the final accountability lays on LG. Ministry of Interior has analyzed the LGs practices of contracting out services to third sector and it showed that the quality of outcomes has not always been the main focus and in some cases the supervision over service provider was only formal or there was no supervision at all. Therefore Ministry of the Interior (MoI) has prepared a concept of contracting out public service delivery to third sector in LGs which is aimed to uniform the practices and to focus more on the quality of the service and to the improvement of the service delivery process. MoI together with line ministries will therefore elaborate concrete guidelines for improving the service delivery process, for standardizing and describing services etc.

MoI supports LG in the area of ICT and e-services on local level. The main objective of the ministry is to help local governments in the implementation of various interoperable information systems, facilitating thus, first and foremost, the communication of citizens at local level, which is the primary level of public service provision.

There are a project for developing a service portal for LGs (which provides LGs a uniform website design and content guidelines for officials and freeware Web content management application, comprises different public service data, feedback modules etc), and information system for local councils (which combines different work processes of council e.g. preparation of legal act, submitting council decisions, enables council member to participate on council meeting via internet, enables local inhabitants to watch the council meeting in real time etc.) which are going to be implemented this year.

Information system for local councils is a web based system for local democracy procedures. The main features of the developed software are:

       Communicates (synchronizes) with any of the document managing software which is in accordance with the standards (x-tee, usage of the ID cards, etc.) In other words, software is using virtually the same documents which are actually stored in document management software.

       Software can digitally generate views for different categories of users, roles performed (by the council, government, state, official, administrator), linking them according the procedural regulations of the local administration.

       Enables the decision-making with using digital authentification - therefore allowing the members of the council to practice their free will.

       Enables full preparation for the council´s and it´s commissions meetings (homework).

       Allows member´s virtual participation from the council´s and it`s substructure´s meetings (via internet) with full rights and real-time overview.

       Offers special citizen´s view, allowing the public to input their own proposals, amendments to the drafts as well as give opinion in real-time. Citizen´s view also provides a video and sound stream from the meeting of the local council.

          Allows interfacing with other information systems (e.g. Local Authorities Websites, Electronic Journal of the State) in order to prevent duplication of functionality, and to arrange for the rapid exchange of information.

The result will be:

w  Faster and more informed decision making in the municipality

w  Lesser need for using paper and postage

w  The possibility of a broader participating democracy at the level of local decision making

w  Logically linked administration and decision making using IT solutions

w  Democracy can be taken as a e-service, too

Service portal for LGs (uniform solution for Local Authorities Websites)

There are 226 local authorities in Estonia and the law (Public Information Act) provides that a LG must have a website. Existing websites vary a lot between authorities: different data structures (same data is located in different places) and design (sometimes non user-friendly); many websites do not comply with modern standards; very few e-services and ID card possibilities are used.

For the CITIZENS it is difficult to obtain information, because the web pages differ in content and standards.

MoI is preparing a unified web site, which features: enable to improve the access to information and services via internet; provide the opportunity to participate in decision-making and feedback.

The software consists of web content management (based on freeware), website design and content guideline for officials and website information architecture suggestions. The service includes server housing, software management monitoring, backups; technical support and training for officials (helpdesk),

Some of the modules used in the service portal are: Authentication (possible to regulate access to services via Population register, Property register etc);digital signature; number of ready e-forms (pre-filled); polls; blogs; maps; Internet forum; E-forms management (xforms); calendar of events; text (content) management and more user-friendly modules to make good web.

Supreme Court recently made a decision in the case of City of Tallinn against Government about the measures of reducing local finances due to recession. The decision required government to clearly distinguish state functions implemented by local governments and other local functions given by law and to rearrange/change LG financing system accordingly so that state functions would be financed completely from state budget and there would be sufficient LG revenue base for implementing other local government functions (functions given by law or voluntary functions). Therefore Ministry of the Interior together with Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Justice has planned to analyse the functions of LG and prepare a classification of LG functions (state functions carried out by LGs and local functions) and take these principles into account in the preparation of the 2011 State Budget by ensuring that state functions would be financed totally from state budget. Later on, more specific system for evaluating the sufficiency of LG revenue base is going to be carried out.


GERMANY / ALLEMAGNE

Because of the diverse measures taken on local level it is not possible to list them all, the following examples of local consolidation measures are given:

-          staff cut

-          increase of trade-, real estate and dog‘s taxes

-          taxes for second residences

-          increase of charges for local accommodation, building licence, street cleaning, parking and so on

-          increase of parents' contributions for schooling and education

-          cutting investments for IT-Projects, urban development, etc.

-          reducing government participation in private enterprises

-          flat rate budget cutting

-          closing local facilities as swimming pools, youth hostels, sporting areas


LATVIA / LETTONIE

Information on the reduction of the complexity and costs of the current system of local and regional government and enhancing its efficiency in Latvia

1. The Ministry of Regional Development and Local Government at the end of 2009 and the beginning of 2010 prepared several legal acts, to fulfill the assignment given by the Cabinet of Ministers - to prepare amendments to the legislation, to balance the financial resources available to local authorities with the functions, tasks, rights and responsibilities stated in laws and regulations of Cabinet of Ministers.

Around 20 legal acts are adopted.

2. Since 28th April 2010 amendments in the Law on state and local government officials and employees reward are in force.

It states a uniform remuneration and social security system for all public administration, including local government employees.

Both the councilors of city or county councils and all elected posts, as well as local government administrative employee’s salaries are aligned with the average salary for public sector employees. Also, a unified social security catalog is determined.

3. Since 15th June 2010 amendments in State Administration Structure Law came in force. Till the amendments the law stated, that a public person may delegate a private individual or another public person such administrative tasks as include the taking of administrative decisions. Now the law allows a delegation of an administrative task which does not include the taking of administrative decisions.


 LITHUANIA / LITUANIE   

SUMMARY

- Reducing and simplifying back offices and modernizing internal executive structure of the municipalities.

- Optimization of the functions and reducing staff number in the administration of the municipalities.

- Cutting of the budget.

- Reducing bureaucracy in the service procedures to residents. Simplification procedures of the providing of public services.

- Reducing the costs of services is the main topic. Reducing costs in the delivering of public services. Less money same level of services. Effectiveness and efficiency in the delivering public services.

- Abolishing County Governor institution and administration. Their functions will be redistributed between central government institutions and local authorities. The competences dealing with supervision and control will be delivered to central government, the competences dealing with public services will be delivered to local level.


LUXEMBOURG

Au Luxembourg, le discours sur la réduction de la complexité et des coûts de l’organisation des communes fait partie des débats menés depuis plusieurs années.

En 2003 a eu lieu un débat d’orientation à la Chambre des Députés (= Parlement luxembourgeois) au sujet de la répartition des compétences et des responsabilités entre l’Etat et les communes (les communes étant le seul niveau décentralisé). Le résultat de ce débat a conduit à certains réagencements des compétences, mineurs pour la plupart, le plus important ayant été réalisé dans le domaine de l’enseignement fondamental. Par ailleurs le débat de 2003 a clairement fait ressortir l’importance de donner aux communes les moyens humains, matériels, financiers et juridiques nécessaires pour accomplir leurs missions.

En 2008 a eu lieu un autre débat d’orientation à la Chambre des Députés touchant la problématique en question, qui porta sur la réorganisation territoriale du Luxembourg.

Le Luxembourg, qui a actuellement environ 500.000 habitants, est divisé en 116 communes, dont plus de la moitié comptent moins de 3.000 habitants. Le but du débat vise à garantir à l’avenir au citoyen un service public complet et de bonne qualité indépendamment de l’endroit où il habite. Le résultat du débat a fait l’objet de différentes mesures que le programme gouvernemental 2009-2014 prévoit de mettre en œuvre :

- Le Gouvernement s’est tout d’abord engagé à redessiner le paysage communal afin de permettre aux collectivités locales d’assumer pleinement leurs responsabilités dans le cadre de la nouvelle répartition des compétences. Il a retenu le seuil de 3.000 habitants comme masse critique pour assurer le bon fonctionnement d’une commune luxembourgeoise. Pour y parvenir, le Gouvernement mise sur les fusions de communes sur base volontaire, par les autorités et populations locales (référendum), qu’il appuie par des incitations financières notamment. L’objectif visé est de ne plus avoir qu’environ 70 communes en 2017.

- Un autre élément issu du débat consiste dans un élargissement des moyens de coopération entre les communes, notamment par l’introduction d’un instrument légal permettant de créer des communautés urbaines autour des centres urbains.

- Un troisième élément concerne un allègement et une simplification du contrôle exercé par l’Etat sur les communes. En premier lieu le nombre des actes à soumettre par les communes à l’autorité supérieure sera réduit. Ensuite, le nombre d’intervenants dans le contrôle de certains actes sera réduit. A l’avenir, par exemple, l’approbation de certaines décisions sera faite par une seule autorité étatique au lieu de deux actuellement ; le passage des actes par le Commissaire de district (= représentant territorial de l’Etat) sera supprimé et les communes communiqueront directement avec l’autorité qui effectue la mesure de contrôle. – Dans une étape ultérieure, il est envisagé de reconsidérer dans son ensemble le système de contrôle exercé par l’autorité supérieure, ceci en parallèle avec la réorganisation territoriale. L’autonomie communale sera renforcée et la tutelle de l’Etat sur les communes sera assouplie.  


- Parallèlement à la réorganisation territoriale sera également effectuée une réforme des finances communales. Un nouveau plan comptable est par ailleurs en élaboration. Cet instrument sera compatible avec le plan comptable général et avec les exigences du SEC 95 (système comptable européen), tout en respectant les règles de transparence et de présentation budgétaire actuelles. 

- Un code des collectivités territoriales est en élaboration. Il rassemblera tous les textes légaux et réglementaires concernant de près le secteur communal. La codification assurera une garantie accrue de sécurité juridique dans la mise en œuvre de textes débarrassés auparavant de dispositions contradictoires.

- Finalement il y a lieu de signaler qu’une modification dans la fonction publique est en cours qui apportera plusieurs changements importants qui seront également transposés dans la fonction publique communale : reconsidération des différentes carrières, diminution des salaires en début de carrière, prise en considération des performances/compétences des agents pour leurs promotions, ….    


THE NETHERLANDS / PAYS-BAS

THE NETHERLANDS

Reports (fundamental) expenditure review made available in April 2010

In 2009, the government established twenty civil service working parties and instructed these working parties to make expenditure reviews on twenty policy areas, including public administration. The reports of the working parties were sent to the Lower House of Parliament on April 2, 2010. Due to the government crisis in February 2010, the Dutch Prime Minister emphasised in his letter to the Speaker of the Lower House, that the present outgoing government will not draw up an official government response to the proposals. The outgoing government is currently limited in its role and it it up to the new government, which will come into office following the general elections on June 9, 2010, to take a position.

On April 2, 2010 the Dutch Government presented the – all in all twenty – reports of the (fundamental) expenditure reviews taskforces to the Lower House. The twenty reports contain a wide range of policy options to save money on twenty policy issues. The Government had the (fundamental) expenditure drawn up to prepare political choices on future cutbacks. Cutbacks are inevitable since the government finances have deteriorated by the economic crisis.

The (fundamental) expenditure reviews are part of the Government policy to face up to the financial and economic crisis. Contributions to the economic recovery are the first task for the Government. The Government has set out measures to that effect, inter alia, in the Supplementary Policy Agreement. The second fundamental task is the road towards recovery of the government finances. They have been seriously affected by the ramifications of the crisis. Recently, the CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis estimated, for the middle-long term (2011-2015) a sustainability deficit of 29 billion euro. The varieties and building blocks provided by the twenty (fundamental) expenditure reviews offer support in making choices to recover the government finances.

Every report has at least one policy option/alternative available leading to savings of 20% on the expenditure. The budgetary, economic and social effects of every variety are outlined where possible. In order to offer the taskforces the opportunity to examine all alternatives and cutback varieties the Government refrained from imposing any restrictions beforehand.

Because the general elections have been moved forward to 9 June 2010, the reports have been made available sooner. In his letter of presentation to the Speaker of the Lower House, Mr Balkenende, the Prime Minister, emphasises that the present Government will not draw up a Government response to the proposals.

“Given the changed circumstances the Government presents the reports to the Lower House without formulating a Government position. Nor will the Government adopt any position on the reports in the next few weeks. Political parties may use the reports in their preparations for the elections.”

Expenditure Review Report no. 18 deals with public administration at all levels of government


Expenditure review report on structure and financing of public administration in The Netherlands (April 2010)

Summary

Over the past few decades, piles of reports have been written about the options available for organising public administration better and more efficiently. However, many of the proposed reforms in these reports have not come to be implemented. The need to economise may now be of help in putting words into action. The 2010 expenditure review report outlines two perspectives for the long-term improvement and cost-efficiency of the administrative organisation. Moreover, the focus has been placed on the opportunities for cost cutting in the period up to and including 2015.

The foundations for the organisation of the public administration were laid in the first half of the nineteenth century. The world has changed since then, not least as a result of processes such as globalisation, individualisation and horizontalisation. The emergence of Europe has also been of great significance to the organisation of government. While domestic government has adjusted itself to these developments, it has become more complex as a result. Things can be done better and more cheaply.

Principles for a more efficient public administration

A first option for the more efficient and effective operation of the public administration is to have a clear-cut and unequivocal apportionment of duties, powers and corresponding financial resources. ‘Either you have the competence, or you don’t.’ At present, responsibilities and powers are unclear and parcelled out piecemeal across tiers of government. This results in coordination problems and opportunities for ‘passing the buck’. In part, this has been caused by half-hearted decentralisations from the past.

To create an effective and efficient public administration, it is desirable for decision-making, and thus for duties and responsibilities as well, to be placed at the lowest operational level possible. Decision-making, duties and powers should be placed at a higher level only if there is a question of external effects or benefits of scale. Duties have been decentralised in recent decades on the basis of that perspective. The question is whether the present scale of the decentralised tiers of government corresponds to their duties and responsibilities. An expansion of scale and the reinforcement of municipalities and provinces’ implementation powers is desirable.

In such a case, the possibility of placing more policy responsibilities at a decentralised scale level is also better.

Working on the basis of secure trust can increase the efficiency and effectiveness of government still further. Detailed regulation, extensive accountability processes and the heaping up of control upon control are expressions of increased distrust and risk avoidance. It is important for the policy to be designed on the basis of trust.

The public administration can also be improved by focussing more on public accountability and the strengthening of horizontal processes. The government is unable to manage a sizeable proportion of the issues in our society, or, at least, not on its own. Investment in the competences of civil servants to identify horizontal issues and deal with them makes it possible to be a partner in complex processes with social questions at their heart and not the hierarchy of institutions.


Further advantages can be achieved by opening out implementation. Multiple commissioning authorities, collaboration and working for several tiers of government combined with a separation of ownership and commissioning can result in savings.

Perspectives on a future-proof public administration

The working group has outlined two perspectives for the public administration over the long term. The distinguishing element is the presence of a mid-level authority. There is no mid-level authority in Variant A. The provinces and water boards will be discontinued, and their duties will be divided between central government and the municipalities. The municipalities will be the sole decentralised tier of government. The scaling up of municipalities to 25 to 30 ‘regional municipalities’ will be necessary for this. Central government will be the new mid-level authority between the EU and the municipalities.

The central administration continues to exist in Variant B. Municipalities will be the first authority for healthcare and welfare. The focus given to provinces in terms of spatial planning-economic sphere will be enhanced. Along with this expansion of decentralised duties, there is also a corresponding increase in scale for 100 to 150 municipalities and 5 to 8 provinces. The water boards can continue to exist in terms of operational administration or else can be partly incorporated within provinces and/or municipalities.

Measures in the period up to 2015

The large-scale reorganisation of the public administration takes time. That is not to say that nothing will be possible in the coming term of the cabinet. The present administrative organisation can be improved. Part of the measures will also set up transition towards the long-term perspectives. This concerns the decentralisation of central government duties to the provinces and municipalities, on the one hand, and accelerating municipal and provincial redivisions in the Randstad region, on the other. Economies can also be achieved through collaboration and centralisation for implementation and support duties, broader-based central government policy management, decreasing the number of political office holders, decreasing and simplifying regulation and improving financial relationships.

Efficiency benefits can be achieved through improving the public administration, not only in terms of reducing the institutional complexity of and overlap in public administration but also in terms of reducing the number of administrators and shrinking the civil-service bureaucracy. Needless to say, a more far-reaching reduction in the scale of the administrative system is both conceivable and possible – over and above what has been outlined in this report. However, this can be the case only once far-reaching, intrinsic choices are made concerning the duties of government; under no circumstances can it be found in a further expansion of efficiency or through structural changes.


Text Box: Theme 18 Public administration
Policy Variant A: without any mid-level authorities but with large municipalities
Savings in 2011-2015 expressed in billions of euros

                        2011    2012     2013     2014     2015        Structural

Variant A                -           -           -           -      0.46                  1.80

Variant description

·         In this variant, the municipality is left as the sole decentralised tier of government. The duties of the provinces and water boards are divided between central government and the municipalities. The duties of the provinces transfer in the main to the municipalities. These larger municipalities can also take on part of central government’s duties.

·         Major scaling up of the municipalities is necessary if the mid-level authority is discontinued. Approximately 25 to 30 ‘regional municipalities’ will be needed in the place of the current 430 municipalities.

·         The provinces and water boards will cease to exist.

·         In addition to an amendment to the Constitution, this variant will also require a long transitional period to the extent that it will be possible to achieve the full savings only post-2015.

Savings in 2011-2015

In billions of euros (structureel = structural)

 


Underpinning and social impact

·         This variant will cut back the number of political office holders from more than 13,000 to approximately 1,650.

·         Additionally, an estimate has been made on the basis of a number of assumptions in order to calculate the savings that could be made to the civil service bureaucracy within all three levels of government.

·         Savings are likely due to the creation of economies of scale, reduction of supervision, simplification of regulation and less doubling of duties.

·         The working group has assumed in its calculations that, because of the above reasons, greater savings are possible among the number of civil servants involved with policy and supervision rather than among those involved with implementation.

·         In all cases, it has been assumed that the personnel would follow in the event of transferring duties to another tier of government.

Implementation

·         The abolition of the provinces and water boards requires an amendment to the Constitution. This variant requires a transitional period of several years.


Text Box: Theme 18 Public administration
Policy Variant B: Large-scale redivision, sharper focus on mid-level authorities

Savings in 2011-2015 expressed in billions of  euros

                        2011    2012     2013     2014     2015        Structural

Variant B                -           -           -           -      0.37                  1.45

Variant description

·         This variant leaves the current structure of government intact. Alongside Europe, it has central government as the national tier of government, the province as the mid-level authority and the municipalities as the local tier of government.

·         However, both municipalities and provinces have to scale up considerably in order to better distribute their duties and responsibilities. The working group foresees a final picture of 5 to 8 provinces and 100 to 150 municipalities in order to strengthen the mid-level authority and a greater role for municipalities.

·         This variant requires a long transitional period to the extent that it will be possible to achieve full savings only post-2015.

Savings in 2011-2015

In billions of euros (structureel = structural)

 


Underpinning and social impact

·         This variant will cut back the number of political office holders from more than 13,000 to over 5,000.

·         Additionally, an estimate has been made on the basis of a number of assumptions in order to calculate the savings that could be made to the civil service bureaucracy within all levels of government.

·         Savings are likely due to the creation of economies of scale, reduction of supervision, simplification of regulation and less doubling of duties.

·         The working group has assumed in its calculations that, because of the above reasons, greater savings are possible among the number of civil servants involved with policy and supervision rather than among those involved with implementation.

·         In all cases, it has been assumed that the personnel would follow in the event of transferring duties to another tier of government.

Implementation

·     The redivision of municipalities, provinces and, if necessary, water boards requires a transitional period of several years.


Text Box: Theme 18 Public administration
Measure C: Adjustment of the Provinces Fund

Savings in 2011-2015 expressed in millions of euros

                        2011    2012     2013     2014     2015        Structural

Measure C             0     0.22      0.24      0.26      0.28                  0.28

Variant description

·         Cuts to the Provinces Fund, amounting structurally to € 280 million in 2015.

Underpinning and social impact

·         In 2009, the Council for Grants to Local Government (Rfv) observed that the provinces seemed to be in a position to finance almost € 600 million more from internal resources for their package of duties than was assumed from the Provinces Fund when determining the generic grant in 1998. On the basis of the Rfv recommendation, the cabinet took the decision to skim off € 300 million from the Provinces Fund with effect from 2011.

·         An inventory was taken of the provinces’ duties and corresponding standardised expenditure for the purposes of the review. The conclusion was that the provinces spend more in this regard than is necessary according to central government criteria. There was also a question of inefficiency. Provinces can operate with € 279 million less in the spatial planning-economic domain.

·         A supplementary analysis was performed regarding the social domain in which the (statutory) duties of the provinces in the social domain were terminated and the autonomy of the provinces in the social domain was also curtailed. This yielded savings over the long term of € 300 million.

·         The conclusion is justified that, on the basis of an analysis of duties, the provinces can operate structurally with € 580 million less. In addition to the previous withdrawal of € 300 million, a withdrawal reaching approximately € 280 million is possible.


Implementation

·         Adjustment of the Provinces Fund can begin in 2012, because cumulation is set to take place in 2011 through the final portion of the € 200 million occasional withdrawal pursuant to the coalition agreement for 2007-2011, and administrative arrangements were made in 2009 about the increases up to and including 2011. Moreover, the provinces need to be given the time to incorporate this adjustment in their budgets.

·         There is considerable variance among the provinces concerning their financial potential. This variance is caused chiefly as a result of the potential for generating other internal resources. However, a generic reduction of the Provinces Fund will be levelled on all of the provinces equally. Consequently, it is important for the other internal resources of municipalities and provinces to be as balanced as possible in the apportionment system of the Provinces Fund.

·         The volume growth of the Provinces Fund has now been linked in with the development of net-adjusted central government expenditure (standardisation system). If central government spends more, the Provinces Fund grows; if central government spends less, the Provinces Fund’s size contracts correspondingly. When there are imminent central government cutbacks, this standardisation system can result in the contraction of the Provinces Fund being combined with this intrinsic downward adjustment. Therefore, it is of importance to consider standardisation in the near future in connection with the proposed adjustment.

Provinces Fund

Budget in millions of euros



Text Box: Theme Public administration
Measure D: Adjustment of the Municipalities Fund

Measure D: Adjustment of the Municipalities Fund

Savings in 2011-2015 expressed in billions of euros

                        2011    2012     2013     2014     2015        Structural

Measure D             0     0.43      0.85      1.28      1.70                  1.70

Variant description

·     Cut to the Municipalities Fund amounting structurally to € 1.7 billion in 2015.

Municipalities Fund

Budget in billions of euros


Underpinning and social impact

·     Municipalities’ self-generated revenue is higher than the level taken into account in the Municipalities Fund. Taking other internal resources and the property tax (OZB) together, this discrepancy amounts to almost € 1.5 billion. These higher net revenues place municipalities in a position to spend more than is assumed when determining the Municipalities Fund.

·     A quantified benchmark has been implemented for the purposes of the review. According to this analysis, the Municipalities Fund can be reduced by € 1.7 billion.

·     The adjustment of the Municipalities Fund can be filled in by means of increasing labour productivity and increasing efficiency through collaborative ventures, shared services, etc. In order to cushion the adjustment of the Provinces and Municipalities Funds, a reconsideration of (core) duties at the decentralised level is also needed, and local government authorities will be set the challenge of executing their core duties in a more austere and efficient manner.

Implementation

·         The adjustment of the Municipalities Fund can begin in 2012, because administrative arrangements were made in 2009 to run up to and including 2011. Moreover, municipalities need to be given the time to incorporate this adjustment in their budgets.

·         There is considerable variance among the municipalities concerning their financial potential. This variance is caused chiefly as a result of the potential for generating other internal resources. However, a generic reduction of the Municipalities Fund will be levelled on all of the municipalities equally. Consequently, it is important for the other internal resources of municipalities to be as balanced as possible in the apportionment system of the Municipalities Fund.

·         To enable the complete adjustment of the Municipalities Fund to be implemented responsibly, an adaptation to the allocation of the Municipalities Fund may be necessary. To that end, further research will be conducted into this.

·         The volume growth of the Municipalities Fund has now been linked in with the development of net-adjusted central government expenditure (standardisation system). If central government spends more, the Municipalities Fund grows; if central government spends less, the Municipalities Fund’s size contracts correspondingly. When there are imminent central government cutbacks, this standardisation system can result in the contraction of the Municipalities Fund being combined with this intrinsic downward adjustment. Therefore, it is of importance to consider standardisation in the near future in connection with the proposed adjustment.


SLOVAK REPUBLIC/ REPUBLIQUE SLOVAQUE

SUMMARY

The current structural system of local and regional self government in the Slovak Republic is deemed to be appropriate. There are 2891 municipalities and 8 regions in the Slovak Republic. The Government of the Slovak Republic does not intend to change the number of municipalities/regions or their institutional structure. This position is also supported and strongly persuaded by the Association of Towns and Communities of Slovakia

Nowadays, we are dealing with issues how to enhance the efficiency of decision making process at local level mainly in the field of delegated state administration competences. There are also many ongoing processes concerning introduction of IT technologies at local level. All these processes lead to the efficiency and ensuring the stableness of current local government system.

The parliamentary elections will be held in the Slovak Republic on 12th June 2010. If there are any significant measures or declarations related to local or regional government adopted by the new government, we will keep you informed.


ESPAGNE / SPAIN

Est-ce qu’il y a un débat en Espagne sur la nécessité de réduire la complexité et les coûts de l’organisation actuelle des collectivités locales et régionales et l’augmentation de son efficacité ?


Pour répondre à cette question, il faut tenir compte de l'existence en Espagne de plusieurs niveaux territoriaux de gouvernement ainsi que l'existence d'une distribution des compétences dans laquelle il correspond aux Communautés autonomes et aux collectivités locales la gestion pratiquement autonome de la plupart des services publics. Par conséquent, le débat posé demande une rationalisation du système administratif et de gouvernement des différents niveaux national, régional et local ce qui, compte tenu de la grande autonomie d'organisation des administrations territoriales, exige une volonté politique d'agir dans ce sens à chaque niveau territorial.


Une mesure prise au niveau de l'Etat, liée au débat posé, est le Décret-loi 8 / 2010 du 20 mai pour l'adoption de mesures spéciales visant à réduire le déficit, comme par exemple la réduction moyenne de 5 p. 100 en termes annuels des salaires des employés du secteur public. En général, il s'agit d'une série d'initiatives dans divers domaines de l’Administration, conçues dans le but d'accélérer la voie de la consolidation budgétaire envisagée dans le Programme de Stabilité et de Croissance, et développer ainsi la viabilité des finances publiques. Le document détaille également différents outils permettant d'atteindre cet objectif, notamment le Plan d’ austérité 2011-2013 et les Accords-cadres avec les Communautés autonomes et les collectivités locales qui visent à impliquer les autorités territoriales dans la voie de la consolidation budgétaire.


Du point de vue des relations entre l'Etat et les autorités régionales et locales, il y a des mécanismes de coopération et de coordination qui permettraient aborder ce débat à partir des bases communes. Un exemple de ces mécanismes, en plus des Accords-cadres précités, est la Commission de coordination de l'emploi public, qui s’occupe de la coordination de la politique des ressources humaines entre les différents niveaux territoriaux.


En outre, au niveau local on a prévu la réforme du système juridique et du système de financement local, même s’il existe une incertitude sur le moment où elle va avoir lieu, compte tenue de la crise économique actuelle. Plus précisément, dans l'Accord-cadre avec les collectivités locales sur la viabilité des finances publiques locales pour la période 2010-2013, adopté le 7 avril par le Sous-comité du régime économique, financière et fiscale de la Commission nationale de l'administration locale, il a été prévu que dans trois mois les collectivités locales doivent adopter un plan de rationalisation des structures de leur secteur public, administratif et d’entreprise, afin d'améliorer l'efficacité et réduire les dépenses publiques.


Finalement, en réponse à la question concrète posée par le Comité afin de déterminer si on pose en Espagne la question de fusionner des municipalités, il convient de préciser que la modification des limites communales est une compétence des Communautés autonomes, de sorte que, le cas échéant,  l'initiative devrait être de celles-ci. À cet égard, il ya eu des propositions et des études sur une éventuelle réduction du nombre des municipalités par des Communautés autonomes comme Cataluña et Castilla y León, mais ces propositions n'ont pas eu l’appui suffisant des associations des municipalités au moment d’avoir été présentées.


TURKEY / TURQUIE

In fact Turkish local government system is not complex compared to British or Spanish system. Local authorities in Turkey, consist of special provincial administration, municipalities and villages.

         

Although our system is fairly simple this simplicity sometimes causes complexity.

         

First of all, especially in metropolitan areas, local people sometimes do not know who to keep responsible for the services with poor quality. Because in these areas sometimes more than one local and central authority may be responsible and have word in the provision of services. That’s why through the reforms initiated in 2005, responsibilities between metropolitan municipalities and lower tier municipalities were differentiated clearly. But there is still some way to go.

         

Secondly, the separation of responsibilities between central and local authorities in the provision of public services is not always clear. Some public services are considered as local services but central government organizations can still be responsible in the same areas. That’s why, now the trend in Turkey is that to give the responsibility to local authorities as much as possible. But the barriers existed in the Constitution hampered this process and the problem wasn’t solved completely.

         

Thirdly, in rural areas, especially in villages, special provincial administrations are the bodies which provide local services in these areas. The main problem in these areas is the inadequacy of financial resources. To compensate this inadequacy, the government launched a project for completing infrastructure of these areas.

         

Fourthly, local government doesn’t have the power to collect their own revenues because of their lack of capacity. This complexity is mainly the result of existence of small local authorities. Because of this, a scale reform process was initiated in 2008 and the number of total municipalities have been decreased by %10 through amalgamation. Since we couldn’t go further in the amalgamation process, we now encourage local authorities to establish unions.