Joint meeting of rapporteurs of the Council of Europe Congress and the EU Committee of the Regions

Brussels, 3 September 2010

Opening remarks by Ian Micallef, President a.i.of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe

Dear colleagues,

It is a great pleasure for me to participate in this meeting, and there are many reasons for it.

First, it is a very first meeting of rapporteurs of both the Committee of the Regions and the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe. When our two institutions signed a revised co-operation agreement in November last year – an honour which fell on the current President of your CIVEX Commission, then the President of the Committee of the Regions, Mr Luc Van den Brande, and me – we had in mind exactly this type of practical synergy. I am convinced that this new form of joint work will be of mutual benefit to all of us and will undoubtedly increase the impact of our common efforts.

Promoting a coordinated approach to the common issues of concern between our respective committees, commissions and working groups is one of the objectives of the co-operation agreement. I’m glad that, after annual meetings of the two Presidents, regular meetings of the Congress/Committee Contact Group and the participation of Committee members in Congress missions to observe local and regional elections, we are now taking our co-operation a step further. This meeting is a further good example of putting our co-operation into practice.

Secondly, this meeting gives us an opportunity to compare our work, and eventually joint our efforts, in addressing an issue which is important to all of us: the situation of local and regional democracy in the Eastern Partnership countries. This is an opportunity for you to present your opinions on the countries concerned, and for us to share our experience with regard to these countries – experience acquired through our monitoring, observation of local and regional elections and specific projects that we have carried out in these countries – such as, for instance, the question of regionalisation in Ukraine or the setting-up of the National Association of Local Authorities in Georgia, NALAG.

Indeed, through our respective work, we have accumulated much experience and substance which we should now put to good use for mutual advantage. This meeting is the moment to do so.

However, I realise very well that you may not be fully aware of the Congress’ work and methodology, so allow me first to make a brief presentation of our approach.

The Congress is a political assembly within the Council of Europe which brings together 636 elected representatives from municipalities and regions of both all the countries of the European Union and twenty other European countries. Much as the Committee of the Regions, the Congress works to advance local and regional democracy across our continent. On the practical level, our core mission is to monitor, first and foremost, the implementation of the European Charter of Local Self-Government, but also the respect of the obligations which stem from other Council of Europe conventions and treaties, inasmuch as these obligations relate to the local and regional level. So, we are guided in our work by the acquis of the Council of Europe as a whole.

Needless to say, this role and mission makes the Congress a natural partner of the Committee of the Regions in building local and regional democracy in Europe, much as the European Union and the Council of Europe are partners in advancing democratic development at both national and European level. However, although our missions are similar, we have an important differentiation in methodology and approach. I believe that this difference is exactly what makes our synergies mutually enriching, and our work complementary to each other.

The main focus of our work in the Congress is local and regional democracy as such, the democratic framework in and for our territorial communities. The EU and its Committee of the Regions have a broader approach, including to a much greater extent the issues of economic development. Second, our approach is to a greater extent legal, as we are observing the respect of the principles and standards of the Council of Europe – the respect of the European Charter of Local Self-Government, which I have already mentioned, and its new Additional Protocol; the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages; the Madrid Convention on transfrontier co-operation and its Protocols, to name but a few.

In our work, we also draw on the experience and findings of other Council of Europe bodies, our institutional partners – such as the Parliamentary Assembly and the Venice Commission for Democracy through Law, for example. Much as the Congress, the Parliamentary Assembly also uses monitoring mechanisms and election observation as its tools, but in relation to the national democratic framework, whereas we in the Congress focus on the local and regional dimension. The Venice Commission gives expert advice on constitutional law and specific legislation of member states, and we use its recommendations concerning laws on local and regional self-government.

Our mechanisms include regular county-specific monitoring, observation of local and regional elections, and fact-finding missions to look into specific situations of concern. As far as the observation of elections is concerned, I am pleased to say that the participation of Committee members in our missions is another good example of our co-operation, which has been much appreciated by Congress members.

During both monitoring and election observation missions, our first objective is to assess the overall situation, which is to say the political system of the country, the legal framework, administrative practice and the role of the media. Our rapporteurs meet a wide range of political actors, local and regional authorities, civil society, experts, who help to draw a complete picture. I should point out that the Congress relies to a great extent in this work on national associations of local and regional authorities, which are our privileged partners in national settings and which serve as an “early warning” system for us.

The rapporteurs then identify the drawbacks and shortcomings – issues that are not in conformity with Council of Europe standards, things that do not work in practice – and draft a recommendation for improving the situation.

Our recommendations are addressed to the Committee of Ministers of the 47 member states, which transmits them to national governments. The governments are required to respond to our recommendations, and the Congress holds regular exchanges of views on their implementation with government representatives, mostly during our plenary sessions.

Most importantly, this process is part of an ongoing dialogue with both national and territorial authorities, and the Congress is currently moving to introduce post-monitoring and post-observation assistance to help the countries’ authorities to implement our recommendations. Finally, our rules for monitoring and election observation have just been codified in the form of official documents, adopted last June.

Dear colleagues,

This is, in a nutshell, the methodology we use, which is both similar to yours and distinct from it. This methodology, our monitoring and election observation, have allowed us to build up substantial knowledge of the situation in the Eastern Partnership countries, which we have brought with us to this meeting. We have come to this meeting with a desire to be useful to you and your work, and we hope that our experience will be valuable to your efforts as much as your participation in our missions to observe local and regional elections contributes to our common cause of strengthening local and regional democracy in Europe.

This is why I look forward to our discussions today with great interest.

Thank you.