megújított lisszaboni stratégia 2008–2010 · Összefoglaló jelentés az európai tanács...

Összefoglaló jelentés az Európai Tanács részére2008. március 13–14.

Megújított lisszaboni stratégia 2008–2010

HU

A szervezett civil társadalom szerepe

Európai Gazdasági és Szociális Bizottság

CESE 40/2008

HU


Megújított

lisszaboni stratégia 2008–2010: A szervezett civil társadalom szerepe

Összefoglaló jelentés

az Európai Tanács részére

(2008. március 13–14.)

- 2 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

- 3 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

TARTALOMJEGYZÉK

Elıszó és bevezetés ................................................................................................................................5

Az EGSZB véleménye: A lisszaboni stratégia megvalósítása: a jelenlegi helyzet és a

jövıbeli kilátások ................................................................................................................................11

1. Következtetések és ajánlások .......................................................................................................14

2. Bevezetés......................................................................................................................................15

3. Az EGSZB, a nemzeti gszt-k és a szervezett civil társadalom közös felelıssége a

lisszaboni folyamatban.................................................................................................................16

4. Az Európai Tanács 2006. tavaszi ülésén meghatározott prioritási témákkal kapcsolatos

munka...........................................................................................................................................18

5. A szociális partnerek és a szervezett civil társadalom szerepe.....................................................19

6. A bevált gyakorlatok megosztása.................................................................................................21

Az egyes országok hozzájárulásai (protokoll szerinti sorrendben) ................................................25

• Belgium............................................................................................................................................27

• Bulgária............................................................................................................................................31

• Cseh Köztársaság .............................................................................................................................36

• Dánia ................................................................................................................................................38

• Németország.....................................................................................................................................40

• Észtország ........................................................................................................................................44

• Írország.............................................................................................................................................47

• Görögország.....................................................................................................................................50

• Spanyolország ..................................................................................................................................53

• Franciaország ...................................................................................................................................56

• Olaszország ......................................................................................................................................63

• Ciprus...............................................................................................................................................66

• Lettország.........................................................................................................................................69

• Litvánia ............................................................................................................................................71

• Luxemburg .......................................................................................................................................73

• Magyarország...................................................................................................................................76

- 4 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

• Málta ................................................................................................................................................80

• Hollandia..........................................................................................................................................82

• Ausztria ............................................................................................................................................87

• Lengyelország ..................................................................................................................................90

• Portugália .........................................................................................................................................94

• Románia ...........................................................................................................................................97

• Szlovénia........................................................................................................................................106

• Szlovákia........................................................................................................................................110

• Finnország......................................................................................................................................112

• Svédország .....................................................................................................................................115

• Egyesült Királyság .........................................................................................................................118

A kapcsolattartó csoport hozzájárulása..........................................................................................121

Köszönetnyilvánítás ..........................................................................................................................135

- 5 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

ELİSZÓ ÉS BEVEZETÉS

- 6 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

- 7 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

ELİSZÓ

Ez az összefoglaló jelentés azoknak a nézeteknek az áttekintését adja, amelyeket az európai és nemzeti szintő szociális partnerek és egyéb civil szervezetek a lisszaboni stratégia jelenlegi állapotáról és jövıbeli kilátásairól vallanak. A 2008. évi tavaszi csúcstalálkozóra való felkészülés jegyében a jelentés olyan javaslatokat fogalmaz meg, amelyek célja a szervezett civil társadalom szerepének fokozása a lisszaboni menetrend végrehajtásának folyamatában. A jelentés elkészítésében a következı szervezetek vettek részt:

� az Európai Gazdasági és Szociális Bizottság (EGSZB), amely az európai társadalmi-gazdasági szervezetek véleményének kifejtését szolgáló uniós szintő intézményes fórum és

� nemzeti gazdasági és szociális tanácsok és hasonló szervezetek, így a szervezett civil társadalom egyéb alkotóelemei, illetve uniós szinten az EGSZB-n belül létrehozott, az európai civil szervezetekkel kapcsolatot tartó csoport.

Ez a jelentés a 2006. évi tavaszi csúcstalálkozó elnökségi következtetéseiben (12. pont) megfogalmazott kérésre adott válaszként született: „[Az Európai Tanács] üdvözli továbbá a közösségi szintő felelısségvállalás növelése érdekében az Európai Parlament, a Régiók Bizottsága és az Európai Gazdasági és Szociális Bizottság által tett kezdeményezéseket. Az Európai Gazdasági és Szociális Bizottságot és a Régiók Bizottságát munkája folytatására ösztönzi, és arra kéri ıket, hogy a növekedési és foglalkoztatási partnerség támogatásához 2008 elején nyújtsanak be összefoglaló jelentéseket”. A jelentés a legátfogóbb elıkészítı anyag, amelyet a szervezett civil társadalom a 2008-as tavaszi csúcstalálkozóra összeállított. Hozzáadott értéke a következı erényekbıl táplálkozik:

� konszenzuskeresés: a jelentés készítésekor nagy súllyal esett latba a különbözı civil szervezetek nézeteinek kiegyensúlyozott összefoglalása,

� átfogó jelleg: az európai nézıpont összekapcsolása a 27 tagállam szervezett civil társadalma által kifejtett nézetekkel,

� alapvetıen kormányoktól független nézıpont: a szociális partnerekre és a szervezett civil társadalomra a stratégia végrehajtásában háruló szerep hangsúlyozása.

A 2008–2010-es új ciklusban a jelentés folyományaként a nemzeti gazdasági és szociális tanácsokkal és hasonló szervezetekkel együttmőködve éves jelentés készül majd a szociális partnereknek és a szervezett civil társadalom egyéb alkotóelemeinek a lisszaboni stratégia végrehajtásába történı bevonásáról. Az EGSZB egyértelmően üdvözölné, ha az Európai Tanács ismét megbízná azzal, hogy a lisszaboni stratégia nyomon követési folyamatának keretében folytassa a szociális partnerekkel és a szervezett civil társadalom egyéb alkotóelemeivel rendszeresen végzett munkáját.

- 8 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

BEVEZETÉS A 2008. évi tavaszi csúcstalálkozóra való felkészülés jegyében az EGSZB 2006 júniusában úgy határozott, hogy „Lisszaboni csoport – a megújított lisszaboni stratégia (2006. tavasz–2008. tavasz)” elnevezéső csoportot hoz létre azzal a céllal, hogy 2008 tavaszára a nemzeti gszt-kkel és hasonló szervezetekkel szorosan együttmőködve jelentést készítsen.

2007 februárjában az EGSZB állásfoglalást1 terjesztett a tavaszi csúcstalálkozó elé, amelyben arra ösztönözte az Európai Tanácsot és a tagállamokat, hogy szánjanak tevékenyebb szerepet a szervezett civil társadalomnak. Ahhoz, hogy az összefoglaló jelentéshez kellıen kialakított tematikus alapot

tudjon biztosítani, az EGSZB négy saját kezdeményezéső véleményt2 fogadott el a 2006. tavaszi Európai Tanács által prioritásként meghatározott területek témájában:

• beruházások a tudásba és az innovációba,

• a vállalkozásokban rejlı lehetıségek, különös tekintettel a kkv-kra,

• foglalkoztatás a kiemelt népességcsoportokban és

• Európa energiapolitikájának meghatározása. Ezek a vélemények egyes szakpolitikákra vonatkozó javaslatokat fogalmaznak meg, és példákat hoznak fel a különbözı érintett szakterületeken kialakított bevált gyakorlatokra. A véleményekbe beépültek azok a 27 tagállamból érkezı elıkészítı anyagok, amelyeket a nemzeti gszt-k, illetve egyéb partnerszervezetek állítottak össze. A négy említett vélemény alapján tájékoztató füzet is készült „58

konkrét intézkedés a lisszaboni stratégia sikerének biztosítására”3 címmel. Végezetül pedig a 2008-as összefoglaló jelentés folytatja a fent említett négy vélemény kapcsán végzett szakmai munkát. Hangsúlyozza, hogy a tagállamokban a szervezett civil társadalom bevonásának megerısítése igen fontos a végrehajtás folyamata során, és igyekszik feltárni a civil társadalom részvételének kilátásait a 2008 márciusa utáni idıszak vonatkozásában. Az EGSZB átfogó elemzéséhez kapcsolódva a jelentés rávilágít az egyes, nemzeti szinten tevékenykedı gszt-k munkájára, lehetıvé téve a civil társadalom képviselıi számára, hogy kifejezésre jutassák véleményüket a stratégia jelenlegi állásáról és kilátásairól, valamint arról, hogy annak végrehajtásába az illetékes nemzeti hatóságok milyen mértékben vonják be ıket. A jelentés elemzi a különbözı tagállamok sajátos helyzetét, és kitér a különbözı határidıkre, illetve jövıbeli prioritásokra. Az átfogó cél a megújított lisszaboni stratégia megvalósításához szükséges kulcsfontosságú intézkedések és

1 Az EGSZB állásfoglalása (A megújított lisszaboni stratégia végrehajtása, CESE 298/2007) elérhetı a bizottság honlapján belül a

lisszaboni stratégiának szentelt oldalon: http://www.eesc.europa.eu/lisbon_strategy/eesc_documents/index_en.asp.

2 A négy különbözı témát érintı vélemény elérhetı a bizottság honlapján belül a lisszaboni stratégiának szentelt oldalon:

http://www.eesc.europa.eu/lisbon_strategy/eesc_documents/index_en.asp.

3 Az EGSZB tájékoztató füzete elérhetı a bizottság honlapján belül a lisszaboni stratégiának szentelt oldalon:

http://www.eesc.europa.eu/lisbon_strategy/eesc_documents/index_en.asp.

- 9 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

legjobb gyakorlatok azonosítása, így biztosítva, hogy a lendület a növekedési és foglalkoztatási partnerség valamennyi pillérében fennmaradjon. A jelentés az EGSZB kapcsolattartó csoportjának hozzájárulását is tartalmazza. Az Európai Tanács elé terjesztett, a nemzeti gszt-kkel közösen készített második jelentésében az EGSZB arra kéri a tagállamokat, hogy újítsák meg megbízatását, és kérjenek gyakorlati javaslatokat is tartalmazó és a kívánatosnak tőnı kiigazításokra is kitérı éves jelentést arról, hogy mennyire vonják be a szervezett civil társadalmat, illetve – amennyiben az adott országban létezik ilyen – a nemzeti gszt-ket a lisszaboni stratégia végrehajtásának elımozdításába.

_____________

- 10 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

- 11 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

AZ EURÓPAI GAZDASÁGI ÉS SZOCIÁLIS BIZOTTSÁG

VÉLEMÉNYE

- 12 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

- 13 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...


Lisszaboni csoport

Brüsszel, 2007. december 13.

Az Európai Gazdasági és Szociális Bizottság

VÉLEMÉNYE

Tárgy: A lisszaboni stratégia végrehajtása: a jelenlegi helyzet és a jövıbeli kilátások

_____________

- 14 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

2007. szeptember 27-én az Európai Gazdasági és Szociális Bizottság úgy határozott, hogy Eljárási Szabályzata 29. cikkének (2) bekezdése értelmében saját kezdeményezéső véleményt dolgoz ki az alábbi tárgyban:

A lisszaboni stratégia végrehajtása: a jelenlegi helyzet és a jövıbeli kilátások Az EGSZB Elnöksége megbízta a „Lisszaboni csoport” nevő ad hoc testületét a bizottsági munka elıkészítésével. Az elıadó Joost VAN IERSEL és BARABÁS Miklós volt. A munka sürgısségére való tekintettel az Európai Gazdasági és Szociális Bizottság 2007. december 12–13-án tartott, 440. plenáris ülésén (a december 13-i ülésnapon) Joost Van Iersel személyében fıelıadót, Barabás Miklós személyében pedig társelıadót jelölt ki, továbbá 122 szavazattal 1 ellenében, 12 tartózkodás mellett elfogadta az alábbi véleményt.

*

* * 1. Következtetések és ajánlások 1.1 Az EGSZB kívánatosnak tartja a tagállamok szervezett civil társadalmának – és különösen,

adott tagállamokban4, a nemzeti gazdasági és szociális tanácsoknak (gszt-knek) – a lisszaboni menetrend végrehajtásába tevékeny partnerként történı bevonását. E célból az EGSZB az alábbiakat javasolja.

1.1.1 A kormányokon kívül a társadalmi szervezeteknek is ösztönözniük kell az alkotóerejő

megközelítéseket, valamint gyakorlati és konkrét lépéseket kell tenniük a változás érdekében. További partnerségek és új szövetségek szükségesek a lisszaboni folyamat sikeressé tételéhez,

megvalósulásának elısegítéséhez5. E célból ez a vélemény elsısorban a nemzeti gszt-k és a szervezett civil társadalom hozzájárulásával foglalkozik.

1.1.2 A több tagállamban bevált legjobb gyakorlatok követéséhez mindenütt szükséges a

tájékoztatás, a konzultáció és az átláthatóság a nemzeti reformprogramok (NRP-k) tervezése és végrehajtása, valamint az országspecifikus ajánlások megvalósítása érdekében.

1.1.3 Fontos az is, hogy a szervezett civil társadalmat már egy korai szakaszban bevonják a 2010

utáni új ciklusra vonatkozó jövıbeli kilátások megfogalmazásába, amelynek a növekedésen, a munkahelyteremtésen, a társadalmi kohézión és a fenntartható fejlıdésen kell alapulnia.

4 Az intézményi háttér igen sokszínő e szempontból az EU-ban: a gszt-k számos tagállamban jelen vannak, a legtöbb „új”

tagországban ún. háromoldalú bizottságokat találunk (a szociális partnerek és a kormány részvételével), néhány tagállamban viszont nem létezik gszt. Az EGSZB arra törekszik, hogy a képviseleti testületektıl a lehetı legtöbb hozzájárulást nyerje, melyeket mellékletként a véleményhez csatol az Európai Tanács elé terjesztendı közös jelentés keretében.

5 Lásd az EGSZB állásfoglalását „A megújított lisszaboni stratégia végrehajtása” címmel (CESE 298/2007).

- 15 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

1.1.4 Az EGSZB kiemeli, hogy a fentiek eredményes megvalósítása fokozni fogja a lisszaboni menetrend olyannyira kívánatos ismertségét és hosszú távú konzisztenciáját.

1.1.5 Igen hasznos lehetne az EGSZB és a nemzeti gszt-k között az NRP-krıl és a lisszaboni

menetrendrıl folytatott eszme- és tapasztalatcsere. Az EGSZB támogatólag lépne fel ebben a folyamatban.

1.1.6 Valamennyi nemzeti gszt-t be kellene vonni az Európai Bizottság éves konzultációiba. A

nemzeti gszt-k és civil szervezetek felkérhetnék az EB képviselıit, hogy nemzeti összefüggésben vitassanak meg elgondolásokat és alkalmazandó megközelítéseket.

1.1.7 A Tanácsnál folyó munka tekintetében az EGSZB szívesen részt vesz a lisszaboni

módszertani munkacsoport tevékenységében, amely a Tanács gazdaságpolitikai bizottságának égisze alatt zajlik.

1.1.8 Az EGSZB azt javasolja, hogy az Európai Tanács kérje fel ıt arra, hogy a rendelkezésre álló

információk birtokában évente jelentést adjon ki arról, hogy a tagállamok társadalmi szervezetei, és ahol léteznek, a nemzeti gszt-k hogyan vesznek részt a lisszaboni stratégia

megvalósításában, konkrét javaslatokat és fejlesztési célokat is megfogalmazva6. Az EGSZB azt javasolja, hogy az Európai Tanács kérje fel ıt arra, hogy évente jelentést adjon ki arról, hogy összességükben véve a nemzeti gszt-k hogyan vesznek részt a lisszaboni stratégia megvalósításában, konkrét javaslatokat és fejlesztési célokat is megfogalmazva.

1.1.9 Az EGSZB megközelítése megfelel az Európai Parlament és a Régiók Bizottsága által a

nemzeti parlamentek és a régiók felé tett lépéseknek. Az EGSZB támogatja az együttmőködés továbberısítését.

2. Bevezetés 2.1 2005 óta a lisszaboni folyamatban mind tartalmilag, mind pedig intézményileg elırehaladás

történt. A tagállamok egyre inkább egyetértenek abban, hogy a versenyképességet (tudásalapú társadalom), a fenntartható fejlıdést és a foglalkoztatást érintı, strukturális kiigazításokra van szükség.

2.2 Intézményi szempontból az újraindított lisszaboni stratégia elemei kedvezı változásokon

mentek keresztül. Ezek közé tartoznak az alábbiak:

• az integrált iránymutatásokra vonatkozó, egyértelmő menetrend,

• részletes nemzeti reformprogramok (NRP-k),

• az Európai Bizottság szerepének tisztázása,

• a nemzeti folyamatok Európai Bizottság általi figyelemmel kísérése,

6 Az EGSZB megjegyzi, hogy a tagállamokban, különösen Spanyolországban mindez nem érinti hátrányosan sem a szociális

partnerekkel folytatott jelenlegi konzultációs eljárást, sem a partnerek illetékességi körét, illetve létjogosultságát.

- 16 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

• országspecifikus ajánlások,

• kölcsönös nyomásgyakorlás. 2.3 Gyakorlati tapasztalat bizonyítja, hogy kezd kifizetıdıvé válni a jól meghatározott, közösen

kialakított európai menetrend és az újjáélesztett, a szubszidiaritást tiszteletben tartó, értékes nyílt koordinációs módszer együttese. A tagállamok egyre nyitottabbak a kiigazításokkal kapcsolatos kölcsönös megértésre és kritikus eszmecserékre. Az új eljárások eredményeképpen egyre több tagállam hajlandó a nemzeti határokon túl is tekinteni, és megvizsgálni az ott fellelhetı, legjobb gyakorlatokat.

2.4 Ugyanakkor szakadék húzódik a retorika és a valóság között. Az igazi kérdés a végrehajtás,

amely gyakran hiányos vagy nem megfelelı. Számos esetben hiányoznak a konkrét célok, a mérhetı célkitőzések és az ütemtervek.

2.5 Ezenkívül lényeges különbségek vannak az egyes tagállamok között. Nem minden tagállam

fogad el ugyanis könnyen kritikus megjegyzést partnerországtól vagy az Európai Bizottságtól. A többoldalú felügyelet keretében a tagállamok jelenleg bizonyos mértékben kölcsönösen elemzik egymás NRP-it.

2.6 A kormányok többségében koordinátort neveztek ki a lisszaboni kérdéskör kezelésére. E

rendelkezés elı kell, hogy segítse az Európai Bizottság és a kormányok közötti együttmőködés ésszerősítését és az átláthatóságot. A legtöbb esetben ugyanakkor a koordinációt végzı miniszternek/államtitkárnak még meg kell határoznia a kormányon belüli, valamint a Parlament és a társadalom viszonylatában betöltött szerepét.

2.7 Azt mondják, hogy a lisszaboni stratégia Európa legjobban ırzött titka, mivel e kifejezést

ritkán használják. 2005. évi újraindítása óta azonban – közösen egyeztetett irányvonalak mentén, részben az eljárások kiigazításán keresztül – fokozatosan reformok valósulnak meg a tagállamokban.

2.8 Már beindult a folyamat, az elkövetkezı két év mindazonáltal kritikus lesz a folytatása és az

elmélyülése szempontjából. Mindenekelıtt döntı fontosságú, hogy e folyamat tiszta és elfogadott struktúrával rendelkezzen, hogy egész Európában érvényes stratégiaként ismerjék el még a nem kormányzati szereplık is, és hogy a kormányzati politikák kiigazításához és közeledéséhez vezessen.

3. Az EGSZB, a nemzeti gszt-k és a szervezett civil társadalom közös felelıssége a

lisszaboni folyamatban 3.1 A lisszaboni menetrend fı célja, hogy segítsen az európai társadalomnak megbirkózni a 21.

század kihívásaival, és biztosítani pozícióját és szerepét növekvı számú, világszintő szereplıvel szemben. Ám ugyanakkor egyfajta szellemiségrıl és hozzáállásról is szól.

- 17 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

3.2 Folyamata nem érintheti pusztán a politikák kidolgozóit, a törvényhozókat és más, magas szintő csoportokat. Mindnyájunknak kell, hogy szóljon, és mindannyian részt kell, hogy vegyünk benne, két okból is:

− szükség van a társadalom számos körének bevonására a lehetı legjobb megközelítések meghatározása érdekében,

− a tagállami megvalósítás nagymértékben függ az összes érintett fél együttmőködésétıl. Kulcsfontosságú, hogy valamennyien magukénak érezzék a feladatot.

3.3 A közös felelısségvállalás, valamint a szociális partnerek és más, civil társadalmi szervezetek

tevékeny kötelezettségvállalása megerısítené a folyamatot, mivel párosítaná a „felülrıl lefelé” és az „alulról felfelé” irányuló megközelítéseket. A nagyközönség elengedhetetlen, magas szintő támogatását is maga után vonná.

3.4 Sok tagállamban azonban a gszt-k és a civil társadalom csak korlátozott mértékben, vagy

egyáltalán nem vehet részt a lisszaboni folyamatban. További lépések szükségesek közös felelısségvállalásuk elısegítésére. Azokban a tagállamokban, ahol nincs nemzeti gszt, a részvétel egyéb intézményesített formái alakítandók ki.

3.5 A szociális partnereknek és más civil szervezeteknek a lisszaboni folyamat valamennyi

szakaszában részt kell venniük, az egész év során. E szakaszok a következık: az NRP – és hosszabb távon az országspecifikus ajánlások – értékelése (az éppen zajló ciklusé), elıkészítése, végrehajtása és nyomon követése.

3.6 Az EGSZB kívánatosnak látja, hogy a nemzeti gszt-k elkötelezzék maguk a lisszaboni

menetrend mellett, mégpedig az alábbi négy módon:

− kielégítı tájékoztatás és konzultáció útján,

− a nemzeti végrehajtás kritikus vizsgálatával,

− konkrét javaslatok megtételével,

− a lisszaboni menetrend ismertebbé tételével a nemzeti vita körvonalazásakor. 3.7 Azokban az országokban, ahol nincs nemzeti gszt vagy háromoldalú bizottság, más módot

kell találni a szociális partnerek konzultációs folyamatba való bevonására. Ez a szervezett

civil társadalomra is igaz7. 3.8 Hangsúlyozni kell, hogy ugyanez az eljárás követendı regionális és helyi szinten is, amelyek

gyakran döntı szerepet játszanak a tényleges megvalósításban. Ezenkívül regionális szinten ösztönzendı a partnerségek létrehozása az érintett szociális partnerekkel és civil szervezetekkel a területi és társadalmi kohézió érdekében.

7 Jó példa lehet erre Svédország, ahol a kormány évente többször is konzultál a szociális partnerekkel (az NRP elıkészítése során)

és – külön üléseken – a szervezett civil társadalommal.

- 18 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

3.9 Sıt, a lisszaboni stratégiához kapcsolódó cselekvési terveknek a gyakorlatba való helyi és regionális szintő átültetéséhez az szükséges, hogy azokat a strukturális alapok hatékony irányítása és megvalósítása támassza alá.

3.10 Az EGSZB szerepe pedig négy elembıl áll:

− Be kell mutatnia a szervezett civil társadalom nézeteit.

− Információs csatornaként szolgálhat a nemzeti gszt-k, valamint más civil társadalmi szervezetek nézeteinek kifejezésére, ami annál is fontosabb, mivel ık hozzáadott értéket teremtenek az európai bizottsági és tanácsi vita számára.

− Az EGSZB az eszmék és bevált gyakorlatok megosztásának fórumául is szolgálhat a nemzeti gszt-k közötti koordináció során, továbbá vitafórumot biztosíthat köztük és az

Európai Bizottság között8.

− Az EGSZB hozzájárulhat a lisszaboni folyamat célkitőzéseinek és eredményeinek terjesztéséhez.

4. Az Európai Tanács 2006. tavaszi ülésén meghatározott prioritási témákkal kapcsolatos

munka 4.1 Az EGSZB a 2007. júliusi plenáris ülésén – a kérésnek megfelelıen – négy saját

kezdeményezéső véleményt fogadott el:

• Foglalkoztatás a kiemelt népességcsoportokban9

• Beruházások a tudásba és az innovációba10

• A vállalkozásokban rejlı lehetıségek, különös tekintettel a kkv-kra11

• Európa energiapolitikájának meghatározása12. A saját kezdeményezéső vélemények elkészítésében a nemzeti gszt-k is közremőködtek.

Hozzájárulásaikat a vélemények melléklete tartalmazza. Az EGSZB ezt követıen további véleményt fogadott el az éghajlat-változási stratégiának a lisszaboni stratégiába történı jobb integrálásáról.

8 Ennek kapcsán érdemes megjegyezni, hogy az Európai Parlament a közelmúltban szintén koordinációs struktúrát állított fel a

nemzeti parlamentekkel közösen.

9 Foglalkoztatás a kiemelt népességcsoportokban (lisszaboni stratégia) – HL C 256., 2007.10.27., 93. o.

(http://www.eesc.europa.eu/lisbon_strategy/eesc_documents/index_en.asp).

10 Beruházások a tudásba és az innovációba (lisszaboni stratégia) – HL C 256., 2007.10.27., 17. o.


11 A vállalkozásokban rejlı lehetıségek, különös tekintettel a kkv-kra (lisszaboni stratégia) – HL C 256., 2007.10.27., 8. o.


12 Európa energiapolitikájának meghatározása (lisszaboni stratégia) – HL C 256., 2007.10.27., 31. o.


- 19 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

4.2 Ezek a saját kezdeményezéső vélemények, amelyek a nemzeti gszt-ktıl kapott, a Tanács megítélése szerint kulcsfontosságú kérdésekrıl szóló hozzájárulásokat is tartalmazzák, konkrét forrásanyagként szolgáltak az Európai Bizottság jelentéséhez, és a 2008. márciusi lisszaboni csúcstalálkozót elıkészítı, szélesebb körő vita útnak indításában is szerepet kapnak.

4.3 A jelen saját kezdeményezéső vélemény elsısorban a tanácsi vitához járul hozzá. Célja

elsısorban annak meghatározása, hogy a szociális partnerek és más civil szervezetek milyen szerepet töltenek be a folyamatban.

4.4 Véleményének kidolgozása során az EGSZB felhasználta az európai civil társadalmi

szervezetekkel és hálózatokkal kapcsolatot tartó csoport hozzájárulását is, amely a jelen vélemény mellékletében található.

5. A szociális partnerek és a szervezett civil társadalom szerepe 5.1 Rendkívül fontos, hogy a lisszaboni menetrendet az egész társadalomban nyíltan megvitassák,

olyan, elınyökkel járó európai menetrendnek tekintve azt, amely összhangban áll a nemzeti körülményekkel, eljárásokkal és jogi követelményekkel.

5.2 Az Európai Bizottság dokumentumaiban tárgyalt témáknak jól meghatározottaknak kell

lenniük, hogy szélesebb körben ösztönözzék a vitát a társadalomban. Ha új, gyümölcsözı partneri együttmőködéseket akarunk találni, ahhoz egyrészrıl az kell, hogy a kérdéseket jól körül tudjuk határolni és összpontosítani tudjunk rájuk, másrészt pedig jó tájékoztatásra és kommunikációra van szükség.

5.3 Minél nagyobb az átláthatóság és minél kiterjedtebb a vita, annál tájékozottabb a lakosság.

Mindez egyúttal a kreativitásnak, valamint a nem szokványos javaslatokra és megoldásokra valló nyitottságnak is kedvezhet. Több országban a jótékony hatású intézkedések és gyakorlatok, illetve ágazati vagy céges szinten a szociális partnerek közötti tárgyalások gyakran érdekes mikrogazdasági fejleményeket eredményeznek.

5.4 Az a legfontosabb, hogy hogyan vonják be a szociális partnereket és más, a folyamatban való

részvétel szempontjából illetékes civil szervezeteket a nemzeti reformprogramokba, valamint az uniós ajánlások megvalósításába.

5.5 Mindezeknek a szereplıknek a bevonása a helyi ütemtervek jobb összehangolását is

elıidézheti, ami az Európában egyre növekvı kölcsönös gazdasági függıség és az ahhoz kapcsolódó, a környezı térségeket érintı hatások miatt kívánatos.

5.6 A gyakorlat azt igazolja, hogy ott, ahol a szociális partnerek és más civil szervezetek aktívan

együttmőködnek, a lisszaboni folyamat jobban mőködik. A lisszaboni folyamat elıfeltétele az ellenségeskedéstıl mentes együttmőködési kultúra. A jelek azt mutatják, hogy a tagállamokban már megkezdıdött az effajta együttmőködés.

- 20 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

5.7 A szociális partnerek és más civil szervezetek bevonásának foka tagállamonként változó13, ezt részben a gszt-k és más szervezetek alapszabályaiban rejlı különbségek okozzák, részben pedig a tájékoztatás és a konzultáció – még mindig alacsony – mértéke.

5.8 Az Európai Bizottságnak arra kellene ösztönöznie az összes tagállamot, hogy a nemzeti

konzultációkba vonják be a civil társadalmi szervezeteket és – azokban az országokban, ahol léteznek ilyenek – a nemzeti gszt-ket.

5.9 Az egyes tagállamokkal folytatott konzultációs megbeszélések során az Európai Bizottság

szociális partnerekkel is összeül. Ezt a gyakorlatot fokozatosan ki kellene terjeszteni. Ez lehetıvé tenné, hogy az Európai Bizottság intenzívebb megfigyelıi szerepet tölthessen be. Továbbá azokban az országokban, ahol a kormány is a gszt vagy valamely háromoldalú bizottság tagja, célszerő lenne, hogy az Európai Bizottság a szociális partnerekkel külön folytasson megbeszélést.

5.10 Hasznos lenne, ha a nemzeti gszt-k megosztanák a konzultációval és a bevonással kapcsolatos

tapasztalataikat14, például a következıket:

• a lisszaboni menetrenddel kapcsolatos tájékoztatás és konzultáció nemzeti összefüggésben,

• milyen módon ismertetik a gszt-k véleményüket a kormánynak,

• ezeket a véleményeket a kormánypolitikákban mennyire veszik figyelembe. 5.11 A nemzeti gszt-k között a gyakorlatok összehangolásához hasznos lenne két-, illetve

háromoldalú találkozókat (fórumokat, kerekasztalokat) szervezni. 5.12 Az EGSZB ehhez úgy járulhatna hozzá, hogy példákat győjt a tájékoztatás és a konzultáció

bevált gyakorlataira, valamint összeállítja azoknak az érdeklıdésre számot tartó gyakorlatoknak és intézkedéseknek a listáját, amelyeket a tagállamokban a szociális partnerek és más civil szervezetek igyekeznek népszerősíteni.

5.13 Ami pedig az olyan tagállamok hozzájárulását illeti, amelyekben nincsen gazdasági és

szociális tanács, az EGSZB közvetlenül is együttmőködhet az országos civil szervezetekkel, mégpedig a tagjain keresztül, akik különbözı formájú tényfeltáró módszereket alkalmaznak, például országos szintő meghallgatásokat tartanak.

13

Lásd a 6. lábjegyzetet.

14 A nemzeti reformprogramok megfigyelésére remek példa a görög gszt, amely megfigyelıközpontot állított fel a lisszaboni

stratégia nyomon követésére. Ez jól átlátható eszköz annak megállapítására, hogy milyen mértékő, illetve tapasztalható-e egyáltalán haladás. Ezt a példát más gszt-k is szívesen követnék.

- 21 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

6. A bevált gyakorlatok megosztása 6.1 Minden bizonnyal hasznos olyan konkrét mikrogazdasági példákat hozni, amelyekben a

tagállamokban a nemzeti célkitőzéseket szociális partnerek és a szervezett civil társadalom részvételével érték el, illetve tervezik elérni.

6.2 Néhány példa:

Kutatás, innováció, tudás

• a tudásalapú társadalom népszerősítése,

• oktatás minden szinten, a szakmai képzést is ideértve – új lehetıségekhez új szaktudás,

• az egész életen át tartó tanulásról szóló megállapodások és a nyílt tanulási központok új alapokra helyezése,

• együttmőködés az egyetemek/kutatóintézetek, valamint a kkv-k között,

• az Európai Technológiai Intézet elképzelésének megvalósítása,

• innovációs platformok a magánszektor részvételével. Vállalkozás és versenyképesség

• az induló vállalkozások és a vállalkozói szellem támogatása,

• külön figyelem a kkv-k felé: jogi feltételek, kockázati tıke,

• egyablakos ügyintézés az üzleti vállalkozások számára,

• az adminisztratív terhek enyhítése, ezen belül konkrétan az olyan területek meghatározása, ahol az effajta enyhítés a legnagyobb hatékonyságot eredményezheti,

• e-kormányzás,

• innovációs támogatások a kkv-k számára („innovációs utalványok”),

• külön adóügyi intézkedések. Munkaerıpiac és foglalkoztatás

• innovatív ötletek és mérhetı célkitőzések a fiatalok és az idısebbek foglalkoztatására,

• a hátrányos helyzető csoportok társadalmi beilleszkedésének támogatása,

• a nemek egyenlısége,

• a fenntartható munkahelyek létrehozásának támogatása,

• a részmunkaidıs foglalkoztatás elınyökkel járó megközelítése,

• a „rugalmas biztonsággal” kapcsolatos, új elképzelések és megvalósítási módok,

• új partneri együttmőködések helyi és regionális szinten,

• szociális gazdasági vállalkozások. Ezenkívül az energiával és az éghajlatváltozással kapcsolatos valódi és kézzelfogható intézkedéseket – köztük az ütemezéseket – is meg kell vitatni.

- 22 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

A felsorolt esetek mindegyikével kapcsolatban legalább egy tagállamban már folynak tárgyalások az érintett felekkel. A gyakorlati alkalmazásokról a nemzeti gszt-knek és a szervezett civil társadalomnak megvannak a saját nézeteik. A kormánytisztviselık és politikusok közötti vitákat bizonyosan gazdagabbá tennék a jól irányzott alulról jövı javaslatok – ez is jól illusztrálná az európai társadalomban rejlı lehetıségek többrétőségét.

6.3 Az érintettek bevonásával rendezett szélesebb körő vita segítene abban, hogy új, konkrét

célokat tőzzünk ki a nyílt koordinációs módszer számára. Ez a szervezett civil társadalom elkötelezıdése szintjének meghatározására összehasonlító elemzési rendszert, mutatókat, illetve szakértıi értékeléseket is magában foglalhat.

6.4 Az Európai Bizottság és a Tanács részérıl esetleg érdeklıdésre tarthat számot az is, hogy a

nemzeti gszt-k jelenleg mirıl folytatnak vitát egymás közt. Az EGSZB e témák közül esetleg összegyőjthetné az európai jelentıségőeket. Minél inkább a lisszaboni célkitőzések érdekében alkalmazandó konkrét megközelítésekrıl és intézkedésekrıl folynak ezek a viták, annál nagyobb figyelemmel kísérik majd a kormányzati körök.

6.5 Kulcsfontosságú a megvalósítás menete, valamint az, ahogyan azt a célok, a mérhetı

célkitőzések és az ütemezések biztosítják. A szervezett civil társadalom egésze, különösen a nemzeti gszt-k hatékony szerepet játszhatnak a hiányosságok felderítésében és a fenntartható megoldások megtalálásában.

Kelt Brüsszelben, 2007. december 13-án.

az Európai Gazdasági és Szociális Bizottság elnöke

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

az Európai Gazdasági és Szociális Bizottság fıtitkára

Patrick VENTURINI *

* *

Megj.: Melléklet a következı oldalon.

- 23 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

MELLÉKLET

Kérdések, amelyekkel a nemzeti gszt-knek foglalkozniuk kell a hozzájárulásaikban:

A jelenlegi ciklus: 1) Hogyan vonja be a kormány a gszt-t? 2) Kap-e elegendı tájékoztatást a gszt? 3) Mi a konzultáció struktúrája? 4) A gszt-nek milyen konkrét intézkedéseit vette figyelembe a kormány? 5) Hogyan követi nyomon a gszt a nemzeti reformprogramot? 6) Hogyan segíti elı a gszt a lakosság megfelelı tájékoztatását? 7) Tudna-e példát mondani olyan bevált gyakorlatra, amelyet más gszt-k is átvehetnének?

A következı ciklus: 1) Mit kellene megváltoztatni a következı nemzeti reformprogramban a nemzeti gszt-k nagyobb

mértékő bevonása érdekében? 2) Tart-e kapcsolatot a gszt más tagállamokban lévı hasonló szervezetekkel? 3) Milyen prioritásokat kellene az EGSZB-nek elıterjesztenie a következı lisszaboni ciklusra?

_____________

- 24 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

- 25 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

AZ EGYES ORSZÁGOK HOZZÁJÁRULÁSAI (protokoll szerinti sorrendben)

- 26 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

- 27 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

BELGIUM

Present cycle 1) How is the government involving the ESC? The National Labour Council and the Central Economic Council have repeatedly told the federal government that they would like to be formally involved in drawing up the NRP and, more generally, in drawing up strategic reports for the European institutions and bodies in the areas that fall within their remit. In relation to the NRP specifically, the two Councils have been officially consulted three times. There were some practical problems with this consultation, which are inherent to this type of exercise and result from difficulties in reconciling the European and governmental agendas with those of the social partners. During their work, the Councils did not have access, within the scope of the official requests for consultation, to the documents relating to the three parts of the NRP (macroeconomic, microeconomic and employment) nor the appendices containing the indicators and scoreboards used for the evaluation. This was because these documents and appendices were still being drawn up. Moreover, in Autumn 2006, the consultation came when the social partners were starting discussions about the inter-sectoral agreement, where a number of questions closely related to the Lisbon strategy were discussed.

2) Does the ESC get enough information? Specifically in relation to the NRP, the two Councils do not always have the tools they need to do their job. Given the specific timetable of the social partners' work, they were not able to issue detailed opinions on the formal drafting and its implementation. However, they were keen to contribute to the NRP and to recall, in a joint opinion, the efforts that had been made within the context of the Lisbon strategy, to the success of the policies put in place at national level. Less formally, the departments responsible for drafting the Belgian national reform programme and the Prime Minister's office had regular contact with the social partners within the Councils. The social partners are satisfied with the way these contacts were organised.

3) How are the consultations structured? In Belgium, the national reform programme is steered by the Prime Minister's Chancellery. Each major chapter is drafted by a public body: the finance ministry does the macroeconomic chapter, the Federal Planning Office does the microeconomic chapter in cooperation with the economy ministry, and the employment ministry does the employment chapter. The regions and the language communities are also represented on the drafting committee. Once drafting has been completed, the draft NRP is presented to the Central Economic Council and the National Labour Council. Responsibility for the drafting of this document remains with the Government. In addition, the two Councils and the social partners are invited to attend the bilateral meetings between the Government and the European Commission concerning the drafting and implementation of the National Reform Programme.

- 28 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

4) What concrete ESC measures were taken into account by your government? The latest inter-sectoral agreements concluded by the social partners, based on and supported by the work of the two Councils, deal with matters that are largely in step with the Lisbon strategy. The social partners often take ownership of aspects of the Lisbon Strategy so as to use them to build their strength. They bring new aspects of the strategy into each new inter-sectoral agreement. This process helps with the balanced adaptation of our country's economic and social model. Thus, by way of example and in accordance with the wishes of the social partners (2007-2008 inter-sectoral agreement), innovation and, more generally, Belgium's structural competitiveness are now the subject of in-depth research at the Central Economic Council. The aim is to arrive at a common diagnosis and to make practical recommendations to the decision-making bodies on the national innovation system. Similarly, in 2005, as part of negotiations on the Inter-Generational Pact, the social partners introduced a link between the sustainability of public finances, employment rates, and upgrading social services to the level of prosperity. The latest inter-sectoral agreement also contains a major social element closely interconnected with the Lisbon strategy. Aside from such things as the confirmation of previous commitments regarding training, this agreement includes important avenues towards a modern organisation of work that is both flexible and provides workers with quality work. In particular, this point of the agreement includes provisions on overtime and part-time working, in the implementation of which the National Labour Council is closely involved. 5) How does the ESC monitor the NRP? The Councils believe that efforts to take ownership of the Lisbon strategy must be based mainly on the structure of Belgian social dialogue at every level of decision-making. This implies that the social partners must be continuously involved in making and implementing policies in the areas that fall within their remit. The National Labour Council is closely involved in the work of the Social Protection Committee and the Employment Committee, via regular contacts with the Belgian representatives on these committees and with representatives of the relevant ministerial private offices. Regular contacts and hearings are also held at the Central Economic Council with Belgian representatives of the economic and financial policy committee and with the Belgian permanent representation to the European Union. The Councils have always welcomed this cooperation and are pressing the political authorities to deepen cooperation between the economic, social and environmental sectors, which should lead to a more coherent approach to the Lisbon Strategy.

6) In what way does the ESC contribute to public awareness? There is a recurring theme in statements made by each of the Councils on the issues affecting them and within their remits. Belgium's social partners have always expressed their support for a sustainable development strategy balanced between its different aspects: economic growth, employment and social cohesion, and environmental sustainability, inspired in recent years by the Lisbon Strategy. It is necessary to maintain a balance between the various objectives of the Strategy.

- 29 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

In addition to the messages they give via their opinions, the Councils also organise conferences that build bridges between the social partners, civil society, the world of politics, the authorities and academia. The National Labour Council has organised several seminars in the last two years on the open method of coordination in social affairs, thus helping to define more clearly the role of the various stakeholders, at every level, in this strategy.

7) Would you have examples of best practice that could be used by other ESCs? A major pillar of the follow-up to the Lisbon Strategy is the creation of a European current affairs unit at the Central Economic Council. In cooperation with a university, this unit enables the social partners to select the dossiers that may feed in to their discussions and keep them up to speed with the main developments relating to the aforementioned strategy. At the National Labour Council, two working parties have been set up to monitor the European employment strategy and the open method of coordination in the areas of pensions, social inclusion and health. The Councils are also at the centre of a network of cooperation with several Belgian representatives on European bodies, be they political decision-making bodies or consultative ones. Regular hearings are organised with the Belgian Representation to the European Union and with the Belgian representatives on the various committees set up by the European Union's bodies. These representatives sum up the state of play on current issues and have an opportunity to hear the views of the social partners.

Next cycle 1) What should be changed in the next NRP with a view to deepening the involvement of

national ESCs? The National Labour Council and the Central Economic Council are very keen that the National Reform Programme be widely distributed to the general population in a format that is easily understandable and raises public awareness. They believe it necessary to set quantifiable targets for each of the priorities under the NRP so that annual assessments, and comparisons with our European partners, can be made. The Councils note that overall, the integrated guidelines give the Member States enough room for manoeuvre to target the priorities that best meet their needs for reform. Beyond national policies, however, politicians, the social partners, and economic organisations at regional and local level also have a duty to take ownership of the Lisbon strategy goals.

- 30 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

2) Does the ESC have contacts with similar organisations in other Member States? The two Councils value their involvement in the work of the interactive network set up between the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) and national ESCs. This network is important, as it demonstrates the important contribution that the national ESCs and the EESC can make to clarifying the goals of the Lisbon strategy and implementing it. 3) What should the priorities be for the next Lisbon cycle to be presented by the ESC? In their opinion of 17 July 2007 on the NRP, the Councils proposed that the Lisbon strategy be pro-actively focused on such areas as the economic policy mix, environment policy and external trade negotiations, which clearly benefit from added value as a result of action at European Union level. The open method of coordination has some potential, but mostly in the areas with few externalities, in which the Member States need to carry out long-term reforms and that need to be tailored to the national situation. The Councils also emphasise the difficulty in making progress with structural reforms. These reforms generally bring long-term benefits in terms of economic efficiency or sustainability of policies, but they come at a short-term political and social cost. This combination of long-term advantages and short-term costs often causes action to be delayed. In spite of these difficulties, both Councils believe it necessary to maintain the momentum of structural reforms, which need to be negotiated with the social partners and maintain a balance between their various aspects, as they also bring long-term benefits. The desire to balance the economic, social, environmental and employment pillars must also translate into a better balance in the institutional architecture set up to define and implement the strategy. On this subject, the Councils note that the role of social processes in the integrated guidelines and in the next NRPs will be a very important topic of debate over the next few months. Moreover, the two Councils consider the Commission's aim announced in 2005 when reviewing the Lisbon strategy to be as relevant to them now as it was then: "Renewed growth is vital to prosperity, can bring back full employment and is the foundation of social justice and opportunity for all. It is also vital to Europe’s position in the world and Europe’s ability to mobilise the resources that tackle many different global challenges [such as fuelling] our wider social and environmental ambitions." To achieve this, the Commission stresses the need to ensure that "Europe is a more attractive place to invest and work, knowledge and innovation are the beating heart of European growth, and we shape the policies allowing our businesses to create more and better jobs".

_____________

- 31 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

BULGARIA

Present cycle

1) How does the government involve the ESC? The Economic and Social Council (ESC) organises its activities in accordance with the Law for the Economic and Social Council. The ESC draws up opinions upon the proposal of the Chairman of the National Assembly, the President of the Republic and the Council of Ministers or on its own initiative. The state and municipal bodies have to provide the information necessary for the Council’s work unless special laws stipulate anything to the contrary. To date the government has consulted and cooperated with the ESC in different areas of the Lisbon Strategy. In its opinions the Council has repeatedly expressed views and has made more than 200 proposals on implementing the basic priorities and measures of the Lisbon Strategy and solving country’s main strategic issues. The government acquaints itself with these opinions and some of the proposals have been accepted or are in the process of implementation. 2) How are consultations structured and does the ESC receive sufficient information? The Economic and Social Council has established the practice of consulting representatives of the institutions and the government when drawing up and adopting its opinions, as well as when discussing the strategic economic and social issues of Bulgaria. The ESC carries out consultations in the following forms: Legal forms • The ESC has adopted an own-initiative opinion on “The Lisbon Strategy of the European Union

and the policy of the Republic of Bulgaria for the Achievement of a Competitive and Prosperous Economy”. The Opinion was presented and discussed at an open plenary session with the participation of the Chairman of the National Assembly, Mr Georgi Pirinski, the Deputy Prime Minster, Mrs Emel Etem, representatives of the Presidency, civil society organisations and the media.

• The ESC had been approached by the Council of Ministers and adopted an opinion on the Draft National Reform Programme of the Republic of Bulgaria (2006 -2009) Growth and Jobs. In February 2007, the ESC adopted an opinion on the Draft National Reform Programme which the government then adopted in March 2007. Part of the ESC’s recommendations for the programme improvement was taken into consideration and the Council received a letter from the Agency for Economic Analysis and Forecasting, which outlines the actions undertaken. The ESC was officially notified about the government’s draft report on the progress of measures and actions on the implementation of the National Reform Programme in 2007.

- 32 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

• The ESC has adopted a number of other opinions which are related to the Lisbon Strategy. All opinions have been submitted to the National Assembly, the Council of Ministers, the President of the Republic of Bulgaria and other interested bodies.

Other forms • The ESC has established the practice of public discussions and consultations with representatives

of the government and the National Assembly on the country’s major economic and social issues, including the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy:

- The Prime Minister, the government and the Chairman of the National Assembly participated

in the consultations, organised by the Economic and Social Council, on the draft Government Programme.

- The ESC organised a Round Table on Integrated Policies for Employment, Professional Skills and Economic Growth in association with the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Leading experts of the OECD, ESC members, representatives of the state administration and non-governmental organisations participated.

- The ESC organised a public discussion and consultation on the draft Income Policy Strategy 2007-2009. The Minister of Labour and Social Policy, Mrs Emilia Maslarova, the Minister of Finance, Mr Plamen Oresharski, and representatives of other institutions and civil society organisations participated in the consultations.

- The ESC participated in a discussion on the national strategic documents – the National Strategic Reference Framework and Operative Programmes, which are a key element of the effective absorption of the resources from the EU Structural and Cohesion Funds.

- In cooperation with the EESC, the ESC organised an international conference on the European Social Model – Challenges Facing Bulgaria, with the participation of the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Ivaylo Kalfin, the Minister of Labour and Social Policy, Mrs Emilia Maslatrova, as well as other ministers and Members of Parliament.

- The ESC organised a public discussion and consultations on the National Development Plan 2007 – 2013, in which the Minister of Finance, Mr Plamen Oresharski and representatives of four other ministries participated.

- The ESC in association with the EESC organised a Regional Conference of the Economic and Social Councils and Similar Institutions from South-Eastern Europe and the Black Sea Region on 25 and 26 June 2007 on social and civil dialogue issues.

- The ESC is organising a public discussion and consultation on the Opinion adopted by the Council on the Problems of the Pension System in Bulgaria which is to be held on 10.12.2007. The Minister of Labour and Social Policy, Mrs Emilia Maslarova, the Minister of Finance, Mr Plamen Oresharski, Members of Parliament and representatives of the Presidency will participate in the discussions and consultations.

- 33 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

• ESC members also participate in other consultations with the government and civil society on the topics of:

- National Reform Programme - Operative Programmes - Public discussion on the progress of the implementation of the National Reform Programme

3) What specific ESC proposals have been taken into consideration by the government? In its opinions the ESC voices the positions of organised civil society and has made over 200 proposals on implementing the basic priorities and measures of the Lisbon Strategy as well as such related to solving the country’s main strategic issues. We will mention here only some of the more important proposals taken into consideration by the Council of Ministers and the National Assembly:

• The ESC has proposed drawing up a national strategy on population development and its qualitative reproduction. Result: a National Strategy for Demographic Development of Bulgaria 2006-2020 and a 2006-2007 Plan for its implementation have been adopted.

• The ESC has proposed promoting the production of energy from alternative sources and facilitating the procedures for their building. Result: a Renewable and Alternative Energy Sources and Biofuels Act has been adopted.

• The ESC has proposed adopting a long-term National Strategy for the Development of Education in Bulgaria and undertaking measures to involve business, state institutions and other stakeholders in accelerating the implementation of the strategy for lifelong learning. Result: a National Strategy for Continuing Vocational Training to 2010 has been adopted.

• The ESC was the first to propose adopting a national programme for economic growth and jobs in implementing the Lisbon Strategy. Result: a National Reform Programme has been adopted.

• The ESC has proposed establishing a fund entitled Investment in Youth to accumulate resources for higher educational degrees and better qualifications for Bulgarian youth. Result: the government has committed itself to establishing such a fund.

• The ESC has proposed establishing a separate state institution on migration, with which to ensure monitoring of the migration processes and undertaking the necessary regulatory actions. Result: an interagency working group is working at the moment on the development of a national migration policy under the guidance of the Foreign Minister, Mr Ivaylo Kalfin.

• The ESC has proposed the partial introduction of a regulated voucher system at universities, colleges and vocational schools and creating a competitive environment in the educational system. Result: the government is currently discussing such decisions in the area of secondary education.

• The ESC has proposed a programme against the informal economy, transparency of public finances and state expense policy, and tax reduction especially of direct taxes to levels equal in amount to the expenses for their evasion. Result: after reducing corporate tax to 10%, on the proposal of the Council of Ministers the National Assembly is now considering introducing income tax of 10% from 01.01.2008.

- 34 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

The ESC’s proposals arouse broad public interest, which is evidence of the particular public sensitivity to the issues of demographic development and human capital, investment in education and qualification, migration and its consequences for the country, the fight against the informal economy and reforms in the public sector.

6) In what way does the ESC contribute to public awareness?

• From its establishment, the ESC has participated in the EESC’s initiatives for effectively implementing the Lisbon Strategy and has been actively involved in the discussions organised by the Lisbon Group (since 2006).

• The ESC publishes information on its activities, opinions and socio-political analyses, as well as publications and information on the European Economic and Social Committee through its website, the social partners and other civil society organisations.

• Another way of contributing to public awareness is the involvement in the CES link project, which gives access to a database with opinions and proposals issued by the ESC as well as other EU Member States’ ESCs.

• The ESC has published a collection of opinions, which has been distributed among all state institutions, diplomatic representations and civil society organisations.

• The ESC cooperates with various state institutions, organises public consultations, forums and discussions on topical economic and social issues and on the main state strategic documents. These are broadly covered by the media whereby for 2006 there were over 300 reports of the Council’s activities in various print and electronic media.

7) Examples of good practices which can be used from other ESCs. We consider the following to be examples of good practices in the ESC’s activities:

• The opinion on the draft National Reform Programme 2007-2009 and the government’s acceptance of a number of its proposals

• The established mechanism of coordination and consultation with civil society organisations by means of opinions developed by the Council

• Conducting public discussions and consultations on topical economic and social issues and public adoption of opinions with the participation of representatives of the Council of Ministers, the National Assembly, the President of the Republic and civil society organisations

• The opportunity for organisations which are not represented in the ESC to express their wishes and proposals at the public discussions organised by the Council and in the adopted opinions

• Receiving feedback on behalf of the government for those ESC proposals which have been accepted

- 35 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

Next cycle

1) What should be changed in the next NRP with a view to greater involvement of national ESCs?

• It is necessary to suggest public monitoring of the National Reform Programme (NRP) executed

by the Economic and Social Councils with the active participation of the social partners.

• To broaden the use of public consultations and discussions on key issues related to the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy priorities.

• To develop cooperation between the ESC, civil society organisations, the government and the National Assembly and to create the necessary conditions for a regular exchange of information on the implementation of the National Reform Programme.

The ESC’s priorities for the next Lisbon cycle Civil society is not entirely acquainted with the Lisbon Strategy priorities and there is no sufficient awareness yet of the implementation of national strategic documents, including the National Reform Programme. It is necessary to develop a communicative strategy aimed at achieving better awareness of civil society organisations and activating their involvement. There should be organised national and regional forums for the civil society organisations on the implementation of the measures and areas of impact indicated in the Lisbon Strategy. These forums should discuss the key challenges: climate change, employment and demographic development, innovation and competitiveness in business, etc.

_____________

- 36 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

CZECH REPUBLIC

The Council of Economic and Social Agreement of the Czech Republic (RHSD ČR) was established as an institutionalised tripartite platform for social dialogue between the government, trade unions and

employers. Known originally (1990) as the Council of Social Agreement, it has been renamed several times to reflect the changing demands involved in serious and systematic social dialogue. Today, the

Council is a voluntary negotiating and initiating body that brings together the government, trade unions and employers to achieve agreement on core issues of economic and social development.

Present cycle

1) How is the government involving the ESC? The Council's governing body is the Plenary Session, which consists of eight representatives of the government, seven representatives of trade unions and seven representatives of employers. At present, the government's social partners from the trade union side are the Czech-Moravian Confederation of Trade Unions and the Association of Autonomous Trade Unions and from the employers' side the Union of Industry and Transport of the Czech Republic and the Confederation of Employers' and Entrepreneurial Unions of the Czech Republic. The Council's general secretary is appointed by the government on the basis of a consensus between all three delegations. 2) How are the consultations structured and does the ESC get enough information? The Council sets the draft agenda for its bodies and provides the technical and organisational preparation for its sessions. It produces minutes from the sessions of its bodies, organises press conferences and provides information from its sessions to the government and the mass media. It hands over the final wording of government bills, including introductory reports submitted to parliament's Chamber of Deputies, to the secretariats of the Council's social partners. The head of the Council secretariat is the general secretary.

3) What concrete ESC proposals were taken into account by your government? See 1) – The government is itself a member of the Council.

4) How does the ESC monitor the NRP?

See 1) – The government is a member of the Council and the NRP is one of many issues on the Council's programme.

- 37 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

5) What role do the country-specific recommendations, proposed by the Commission and

endorsed by the European Council, play in the discussions taking place in your country?

See 1) – The government is a member of the Council – such recommendations are incorporated in foreign policy documents relating to economic and social matters and as such are one of many issues on the Council's programme.

6) In what way does the ESC contribute to public awareness?

The Council Secretariat produces minutes from the sessions of the Council's bodies, organises press conferences and provides information from such sessions to the government and the mass media. 7) Would you have examples of best practice that could be used by other ESCs? Our Council works on a "gentlemen's agreement" basis rather than a legal one. It is a collective body that really does work effectively and economically. As presently constituted, the Council is able, in an ethos of mutual trust and prompt action, to maintain and stabilise social harmony in a demanding period of economic transformation, public administration reform and the Czech Republic's gradual assimilation into the European Union. Together with representatives of the government, the social partners play an active part in formulating a certain amount of legislation and strengthening social dialogue is one of the priorities. The Council's bodies are: Plenary Session – Presidium – Working Teams and Groups – Secretariat. The extension of collective agreements at a higher level (industry-wide, for instance) can be regarded as a contribution to the creation of sound and responsible social partnership.

____________

- 38 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

DENMARK

Present cycle

1) How is the government involving organised civil society in the absence of a Danish ESC?

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs calls employers', employees' and civil society representatives together several times a year for a briefing and discussion on problem issues relating to the Lisbon strategy. Such meetings are held, for instance, ahead of the annual spring summit of the European Council in conjunction with the annual trip to Copenhagen by the Commission's Lisbon delegation, and before the publication of the annual National Reform Programme (NRP)/implementation report. However, it is only very rarely that the briefings and discussions have any real impact on the Danish government's work on the NRP. This is not least due to the fact that the NRP in Denmark is not used to shape policy as such but instead serves as a digest of the reforms and initiatives already launched by the government. The Lisbon contact committee is therefore not a policy forum in any real sense. 2) and 3) How are the consultations structured and does Danish civil society get enough

information? Danish Industry (DI) believes that the Lisbon strategy is not ambitious enough considering the political situation in Denmark. There is therefore a reasonable view at ministerial level that the NRP need not be used as a policy instrument in Denmark. In countries where there is great need for reform, there is also a much greater need to involve civil society. For that reason DI considers the virtually minimal involvement which civil society has as sufficient.

5) What role do the country-specific recommendations, proposed by the Commission and endorsed by the European Parliament, play in the discussions taking place in Denmark?

The Commission has not issued any country-specific recommendations for Denmark, only general suggestions. DI believes that these recommendations will not in themselves be the subject of political debate in Denmark. Nevertheless, it might be healthy for political debate in Denmark if greater attention were regularly paid to the integrated guidelines for growth and employment as this could help highlight how in the Danish debate on the shortage of labour and high marginal tax rates, the employment guidelines are systematically ignored.

- 39 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

Next cycle

1) What should be changed in the next National Reform Programme (NRP) in view of

deepening the involvement of organised civil society? Given that the government does not use the NRP as a policy document, it in fact makes very little difference whether any changes are made to the current NRP, or whether civil society is involved more fully, or not. If efforts are nonetheless to be made to involve civil society and the social partners more closely, then hearings should be arranged in good time, before work on the NRP is completed. In practice today, it is almost impossible for interested parties to express their views on the NRP/implementation report before it is forwarded to the Commission.

3) What should the EESC present as priorities for the next Lisbon cycle? DI fully agrees with the Commission's view that there is no need for fundamental reform as far the priorities and the guidelines are concerned. If the reforms outlined are to have an impact in the various Member States, the focus instead needs to shift to their implementation. One possibility might be to select priorities from among the 24 integrated guidelines, although this has to some extent already occurred with the European Council's selection of four horizontal priorities at the 2006 spring summit. It would not be appropriate to change these priorities at this time.

_____________

- 40 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

GERMANY Germany has no economic and social council or equivalent body. Cooperation between government and civil society organisations is on a flexible, ad hoc basis. German civil society organisations wholeheartedly support the Lisbon strategy, which they view as essential for strong growth and better and more jobs. Europe will only be deemed "social" when it creates the right conditions for firms i) to hold their own in global competition and ii) to create good jobs for as many people as possible. The views of German civil society on this matter are set out in more detail below:

Present cycle

1) How is the government involving your organisation? The German federal government involves civil society organisations in the Lisbon policy strategy to varying degrees by means of a variety of measures. Some stakeholders are invited to a hearing by the federal government every year, shortly before the national progress report is presented. This type of involvement allows us to identify areas where improvement is required. For example, in 2005, civil society organisations were not involved early enough in the National Reform Programme (NRP) evaluation process. Since then (in 2006 and 2007), interest groups have been involved in NRP progress reports through hearings held by the federal ministry for the economy. The quality of the hearings could be improved upon. The draft report only is made available a relatively short time before the actual hearing, and each interest group just has 10 minutes in which to lay out its position. At these hearings, only changes to the wording are possible, and none at all to the underlying policy. The substance of the German progress reports has to date thrown up relatively few forward-looking approaches for boosting growth and jobs. Civil society organisations' opinions have not hitherto been taken on board in the progress reports. Nevertheless, civil society organisations regularly forward relevant position papers to the government. In the coming year, we recommend that there be a follow-up process, where the federal government explains to the social partners why their remarks and comments have or have not been taken on board.

- 41 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

Apart from the above-mentioned hearings, there are other forms of participation and cooperation. On the subject of demographic change, the federal government has, for example, involved civil society in the drafting of a National Action Plan (NAP) to a greater extent than in the past. 2) & 3) Does your organisation get enough information and how are the consultations

structured? Consultations often take place at short notice; there is a need for improvement in the information given to the stakeholder concerned. In addition, the stakeholder's input is not adequately taken on board in the federal government's policies. On the other hand, cooperation already works well in specific areas, such as demographic change, social protection and social integration.

4) What concrete measures proposed by your organisation were taken into account by your government?

Civil society submits a number of different proposals which are sometimes taken up by the government. Concrete proposals and suggestions include models for more flexible arrangements for working time throughout a person's career and the abolition of incentives for early retirement.

On education, many specific proposals have been made to encourage lifelong learning and to gear the education system to the evolving economic, social and demographic conditions. Civil society has also exerted strong political pressure in areas such as child poverty and the discussion on the minimum social security benefit required to meet people's basic needs.

5) How does your organisation monitor the NRP? German civil society carefully monitors the events surrounding the NRPs and uses every opportunity to contribute to these programmes and remind the government of its responsibilities. What role do the country-specific recommendations, submitted by the Commission and backed up by the Council, play in discussions in Germany? For the most part, civil society agrees with the Commission's country-specific recommendations. There are however major shortcomings in implementation by Member States, despite the new steering mechanisms (NRP, national officials responsible for the Lisbon-strategy, involvement of the social partners). In Germany, the Lisbon strategy has not developed into a major policy instrument. Country-specific recommendations do not receive the necessary attention.

- 42 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

This may all be tied in with the fact that the Commission is not rigorous enough in assessing national reform measures. Any criticism of the progress reports is most restrained. The Commission should make use of a variety of tools (such as the "Reform barometer" set up by Business Europe) in order to obtain a realistic picture of the situation in each of the Member States. In some areas, the country-specific objectives have also had a positive impact, especially in the debates on childcare and labour market reform. 6) In what way does your organisation contribute to public awareness? The subject and term "Lisbon strategy" are difficult to convey to the wider public. It is above all the underlying concepts that are communicated to the public. Here, civil society organisations make a considerable contribution to informing the public and shaping public opinion, inter alia through brochures, written opinions and public debates, such as the European Economic and Social Committee's (EESC) podium panel in Berlin on 12 June 2007. A further concrete example of work with the public is the fact that the German Chamber of Industry and Trade (DIHK) made 2006 "Europe Year". As part of "Europe Year", more than 400 events were held throughout Germany, with more than 40 000 participating.

7) Would you have examples of best practice that could be used by other similar organisations?

In social protection and social integration, there have been intensive consultations between the government and civil society. There have been joint projects on information and implementation between the Federal Association of Voluntary Welfare Work (BAGFW) and the National Poverty Conference: for instance the "Forum on participation and social integration" (FORTEIL) and "National awareness measures on social integration" (NAPsens).

Next cycle

1) What should be changed in the next NRP with a view to deepening the involvement of

national ESCs? For the next Lisbon cycle, early involvement of the relevant stakeholders would be welcomed, so that the latter could ensure that their expertise and experience was sufficiently brought to bear in the progress reports. In the current progress report, still not enough importance is attached to civil society's contribution, such as the part played by industry and business in the present upturn.

- 43 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

2) Do you have contacts with similar organisations in other Member States? German organised civil society organisations are in close contact with European partner and umbrella associations. The German Trade Union Federation (DGB), for instance, has regular exchanges of views with partner organisations on the Lisbon strategies under the auspices of the European Trade Union Confederation, as do the Confederation of German Employers' Associations (BDA), under the auspices of Business Europe, and the DIHK, under the auspices of EUROCHAMBRES. 3) What should the priorities be for the next Lisbon cycle to be presented by the EESC? In general, the EESC should urge the European institutions to work towards the Lisbon Agenda objectives by adopting a rigorous approach. In particular, there are a few points which should be incorporated into or consolidated in the next cycle of the Lisbon strategy:

• Flexicurity principles, securing both "good work" and" social security" at the same time

• Adequate consideration given to the social dimension

• A discussion on economic governance in Europe, and

• Greater stress on education, vocational training and life-long learning.

______________

- 44 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

ESTONIA

Present cycle

1) How is the government involving civil society organisations (CSOs)? Although formally there exists an Economic & Social Council (ESC) in Estonia, it has not convened since February 2005. There is a clear need for open debate about the need for, and the future role of, the ESC in Estonia. The current structure of the ESC does not satisfy any political needs or the needs of the civil society organisations. Stakeholders contributions have been considered during the preparation of the National Reform Programme (NRP) and the Implementing Report. However, the consultations tend to be formal in the sense that various organisations are invited to these events and able to consult the documents without any real opportunity to contribute to the discussions. 2) and 3) How are the consultations structured and do the CSOs get enough information? The social partners are very involved in the consultations. However, only one representative from each social partner organisation is allowed to participate in the discussion meetings. There have also been written consultations and exchanges of information. The State Chancellery is responsible for coordinating the consultations. Some organisations have been asked to present their views on the NRP during seminars organised on various issues. The most serious problem for the stakeholders is the timing of the consultations. For the past two years the government has distributed the documents at the end of June asking for their contributions by mid-July. There are two problems with such an approach: firstly, the time allowed for analysis is too short, and secondly - and more importantly - July is the holiday period in Estonia and many CSOs are not in a position to comment. The consultation should instead take place either in May or in August/September.

4) What concrete CSO proposals were taken into account by your government? In Estonia it is quite a common problem across all ministries that concrete proposals made by CSOs that do not happen to coincide with the governing party's priorities are not taken on board. However, compared to the last period, this time around the government has accepted the requests of social partners and has earmarked some financial assistance from the European Social Fund for the capacity-building activities of civil society organisations.

- 45 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

5) How do the CSOs monitor the NRP? Each organisation follows the government's Coalition Programme and the policy activities in specific areas in which they are involved. However, one area in which the CSOs are not involved at all is the preparation of the budget. The social partners do transmit their proposals but unfortunately it seems that the government does not consider this consultation necessary.

6) In what way do the CSOs contribute to public awareness? Civil society organisations have the capacity to engage in awareness-raising but they lack the funds for such activities. There are no separate activities to promote the Lisbon Strategy. However, the social partner organisations deal with the issues linked to the Lisbon Strategy on a daily basis and during many public discussions the link between the reforms taking place and the Lisbon Strategy is made clearer.

What role do the country-specific recommendations, proposed by the Commission and endorsed by the European Council, play in the discussions taking place in your country? Although some consultations do take place before the adoption of the national reports to the Commission, the stakeholders do not get enough feedback from the government as to whether any of their points have been taken into consideration. Moreover, the Commission's recommendations are not presented to the stakeholders by the government. Instead, the organisations have to find this information out for themselves. The government, after having analysed the findings of the Commission, could organise seminars for the stakeholders in order to inform them of the recommendations and to discuss how all parties are going to do to comply with them.

Next cycle


national CSOs? The government should involve more stakeholder representatives, and at an earlier stage in the preparation of the NRP process. 2) Does the CSO have contacts with similar organisations in other Member States? The CSOs have contacts with organisations in other Member States but further efforts could be made in order to organise joint events (conferences, seminars) with a view to sharing best practices.

- 46 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

3) What should the EESC present as priorities for the next Lisbon cycle? The EESC should present the following priorities: life-long learning, active labour market policies and the balanced flexicurity approach.

______________

- 47 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

IRELAND

Implementation of the Lisbon Strategy at National Level Ireland has made generally satisfactory progress in achieving the objectives and adhering to the guidelines of the Lisbon agenda. This applies in particular to the Lisbon targets on growth and jobs. Ireland's employment rate reached almost 69 per cent in 2007 so is progressing towards the Lisbon target of 70 per cent. Ireland's female employment rate now exceeds 60 per cent. Ireland's economy is now slowing down mainly due to a slowdown in construction. This will mean a slower expansion in employment over the next few years. In relation to the four priority actions agreed at the 2006 Spring Council, progress was as follows:

• Investing more in knowledge and innovation: This is an area where there have been major developments in Ireland under the Lisbon agenda. Ireland's expenditure on R&D in 2006 was 1.3 per cent of GDP remains well below the Lisbon target of 3 per cent. However it has increased substantially in recent years and there are plans for further substantial increases in publicly funded R&D and increased R&D expenditure by the business sector is being promoted. In addition to providing increased funding, efforts are being directed towards exploring, promoting and developing the networks that bring companies and researchers together.

• Unlocking business potential, especially of SMEs: Ireland is rated as an attractive location internationally in which to start a business. The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2006 ranked Ireland 2nd in the EU and 7th among OECD countries for entrepreneurial activity. A forum was established to advise the Government on the adequacy and appropriateness of current public policies that affect small business. It issued a report in 2006 and progress is being made in implementing its recommendations. These include additional fiscal measures to attract financing for start-ups and to ease the administrative burdens on the SME sector.

• Greater adaptability of labour markets based on flexicurity: Specific targets and investment programmes to support participation by people of working age in the labour market are outlined in current ten-year social partnership agreement between the social partners, Towards 2016. Key developments include increased emphasis on promotion of training and skills development; enhanced engagement with the unemployed and inactive to ensure access to employment; progressive changes to the tax and welfare systems to increase the rewards of work and to ensure an adequate income for the unemployed; and greater focus on employment rights compliance.

• Energy and climate change: Ireland's current greenhouse gas emissions are at present well above Ireland's Kyoto target. In 2005 emissions were 25 per cent above the 1990 level compared to Kyoto target of limiting the increase to 12 per cent above the 1990 level over the period 2008 to 2012. A revised National Climate Change Strategy has been published with measures designed to bring emissions within the Kyoto target. This includes the purchase of emission credits from abroad. A target has been set that one third of all electricity production will be generated from renewable sources by 2020, with an interim target of 15 per cent by 2010. The Government is

- 48 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

committed to introducing a Sustainable Travel and Transport Action Plan in 2008 to reverse unsustainable trends in the transport sector and help it evolve along a more efficient pathway.

While Ireland has generally made satisfactory progress on the Lisbon agenda, two areas of concern to the social partners have been as follows:

• Lifelong learning: Ireland's level of participation in lifelong learning at 7.5 per cent remains well below the Lisbon target of 12.5 per cent. The NESC has pointed out that progress on this issue has been subject to deadlock. Funding has now been increased and a junior minister has been appointed to achieve a co-ordinated approach to this issue.

• Childcare: NESC has noted that Ireland has substantial ground to make up in improving the supply and affordability of early childhood education and childcare and the family friendliness of its workplaces.

Role of Social Partners Ireland's National Reform Partnership is the social partnership process. In 2005 the social partners in NESC agreed on a new strategy for economic and social policy. A particular feature of this strategy was a focus on the objective of sustainability and reaching a new understanding of the relationship between economic, social and environmental goals. The NESC strategy provided the basis for a new agreement between the social partners, Towards 2016. For the first time this provides agreement on general policy direction for a ten-year period. Energy and Climate Change Study

The social partners in NESC have agreed to undertake a study on Ireland's climate change and energy policy in 2008. This study will help build understanding among the social partners on the implications of achieving a sustainable approach to energy and climate change. There will be a particular focus on implications of meeting Ireland's likely commitment to the agreed EU target of a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of 20 per cent by 2020. Futures Ireland/Learning Society Foresight Through the National Economic and Social Development Office – the umbrella body for Ireland's social partnership organisations – a project is being undertaken to understand the implications of moving to a knowledge society. There is wide ranging social partnership and other stakeholder involvement in this study. The project will examine governance, decision-making processes and public policy with the aim of enhancing Ireland's capacity to anticipate and prepare for a future in a learning society that may be profoundly different from the present. A National Advisory Panel (NAP) has been formed to support the work of the project and an international consultant and a national consultant have been appointed to work with the NESDO project team. The Futures Ireland project is due for completion in June 2008.

- 49 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

Flexicurity and Activation

The social partners have been actively involved in the development of Ireland's policies on flexicurity and labour market activation. These concepts featured prominently in a NESC study, The Developmental Welfare State (2005). This study concluded that significant changes in social policies and institutions are now required if Ireland is to make further inroads into old social deficits, respond to new social needs, and meet higher expectations and standards. The study proposes a re-conceptualisation of the core structure of the welfare state. This posits three overlapping areas of welfare state activity: services, income supports and innovative or activist measures. Within this reconceptualisation the social partners reached agreement on the development of an Irish form of flexicurity. Subsequently, the social partners reached agreement on targets and programmes in relation to this in the Towards 2016 agreement, as noted above.

Economy Study

The NESC is at present undertaking a study of the transitions under way in the Irish economy and how the economy can best adapt to changed environment. This study will include examination of the future of manufacturing, the rise of services, regional dynamism and national solidarity and globalization.

_____________

- 50 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

GREECE The revision of the Lisbon strategy by the European Council involved drawing up integrated guidelines to support specific objectives and required that the Member States present National Reform Programmes fleshing out the content of the integrated guidelines in the form of specific national policy measures. The group of experts of the Ministry of Economics and Finance, which is led by the prime minister's advisor, invited the social partners to help frame the Greek reform programme. The Economic and Social Council was involved from the start in the consultation process through the Lisbon Strategy Observatory, which was already set up before the NRP and made analytical proposals on the policies and measures that would be needed to realise the Lisbon objectives. The National Reform Programme then was put to the social partners for assessment before being submitted to the EU. The Observatory's scientific group conducted an analytical study of the proposed reforms and the programme's overall structure. This process resulted in the drafting of OKE opinion No. 140 on The 2005-2008 National Reform Programme in the context of the Lisbon Strategy, which in addition to comments on the basic areas of intervention, noted that the fundamental problem with the NRP was the vague approach taken to objectives, with an absence of time- and quantity-related commitments and considerations. Procedure dictates that after one year of implementing the National Reform Programme national governments must assess developments, the progress of the reforms and their impact on the basic Lisbon objectives. Using the network it set up to link all the public stakeholders in the NRP, the Observatory gave the OKE's working group all the data necessary to evaluate the first year of NRP implementation. The basic views set out in Opinion No. 161 (2006 report on the implementation of the 2005-2008 National Reform programme) were the outcome of careful monitoring of the NRP's various policies and activities and the evaluation of their impact on the competitiveness of the Greek economy and on promoting its strong points, on upgrading human resources and employment, and on protecting and improving the environment. The entire process of critically evaluating the qualitative and quantitative results of the NRP reforms is founded on the planning and development of the Lisbon objectives monitoring system. The monitoring system was developed and is coordinated by the Lisbon Strategy Observatory. More specifically, and in terms of inputs, the monitoring system is based on: a) the breakdown of the National Reform Programme into basic individual goals and

detailed reform actions; b) the creation of a system of monitoring indicators;

- 51 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

c) the development of a comprehensive database with on-going input of values for the most basic monitoring indicators regarding the progress of the reforms and their impact on the main Lisbon objectives. The database is now kept up-to-date with the most recent available values for the indicators chosen.

d) the development of an informal network of the main bodies responsible for implementing

the reform policies in order to collect primary information at fixed intervals. The results of the evaluations and the ensuing proposals, both actual and future, together with the work of the Observatory, continuously monitoring the National Reform Programme, embody and serve the social dimension as the driving force for productivity and development. Efforts to further motivate civil society led in October 2005 to a meeting on the Lisbon Strategy: option or necessity?, attended by all the social actors. GOOD PRACTICE Tasking the Economic and Social Council of Greece with systematically monitoring developments in the Greek economy in the light of the Lisbon objectives was considered to be very important. With a view to carrying out this work, the ESC set up the Lisbon Strategy Observatory at the beginning of 2006. This is not an isolated measure, but a sustained continuation of its consultative work. More specifically, the Observatory's work centres on: a) monitoring and evaluating national policies designed to improve the competitiveness of the

Greek economy, the quality of human resources and employment (quality and number of jobs);

b) monitoring and evaluating progress made with implementing the objectives, and the impact

on competitiveness, human resources and employment of the various measures carried out under the above-mentioned policies;

c) identifying delays and deficiencies, and formulating specific proposals for improvement; d) drawing up regular reports on trends in the Lisbon strategy implementation indicators. The balanced development of the Observatory's four areas of activity will guarantee a real contribution to improving the performance of the Greek economy as gauged by performance indicators common to all the Member States. Cooperation with expert bodies (Employment Institute/General Confederation of Greek Workers, Institute for Economic and Industrial Studies, Panhellenic Confederation of United Agricultural Associations) and with the scientific expertise of the social partners is a basic prerequisite for the success of the whole undertaking because it will ensure the technical skills, scientific support and constructive dialogue needed for this initiative. The Observatory's scientific group is responsible for running and coordinating all its activities,

- 52 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

establishing specifications, giving guidelines, evaluating and deciding on the basic spheres of action, supporting social consensus and publishing the definitive observations.

_____________

- 53 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

SPAIN

PARTICIPATION OF THE SOCIAL PARTNERS AND ORGANISED CIVIL SOCIETY REPRESENTATIVES

IN THE NATIONAL REFORM PROGRAMMES AND THE LISBON ST RATEGY

1. In order to properly assess the role of the Spanish Economic and Social Council (ESC) in the

National Reform Programmes (NRPs) and, more generally, in the European employment strategy, it is essential to understand the part that it plays in the participation systems for the social partners and organised civil society.

This participation involves a variety of methods and institutions which, in one way or another, can impact on the drafting and implementation of the NRPs. These are described below, and include the Economic and Social Council, institutional bodies, consultation processes for the drafting of regulations in the various ministerial fields, and social consultation processes.

2. - The ESC embraces the most representative trade union and employers' organisations (at

State- and autonomous community-level), and representatives of civil society (social economy, maritime/fishing sector, organisations of farmers, consumers and users), together with government-appointed experts. The ESC issues mandatory opinions on draft legislation in the socio-economic field, and on other legislation on which the government requests its opinion. It also draws up reports on socio-economic issues, either on its own initiative or at the request of the government, and drafts an annual report on the situation in Spain.

- Within the various ministerial departments are institutional participation bodies on

which the social partners and organised civil society are represented, depending on the subjects dealt with by the department. These bodies may be involved in the management of the corresponding public structure, or may have an advisory role with regard to the policies of the department.

- The various ministerial departments hold consultations with the social partners and

representatives of organised civil society, during the procedures for drafting legislation on issues which affect their interests, and depending on the subjects dealt with by the department.

- The social partners hold dialogues or social consultation processes among themselves or

on a tripartite basis with the government, concerning the major topics on the social agenda, such as employment and social protection systems, which result in social consultation agreements.

- 54 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

3. - With regard to the NRPs, particularly the drafting phase, the procedure used is one of direct consultation with the social partners. In September 2006, the government and the social partners signed a protocol for consultation, participation and monitoring in the update and implementation of the NRPs. As a result, during the NRP drafting phase, the social partners are involved in public affairs through direct consultation by the national government on this specific issue.

- The implementation phase for the NRPs generally involves legislation or programmes

of public measures, which are subject to the different consultation and participation systems mentioned previously. The organisations involved are able to participate in various areas or stages. It is also worth noting that the NRPs do not only include brand new initiatives, but also involve implementing or developing earlier measures which will have already passed through these consultation systems.

Also with regard to the implementation of the NRPs, it is worth highlighting the contribution of the social players via the social consultation processes, which have an impact on issues such as the reforms of the labour market and social protection systems included in the NRPs. In this context, in the specific case of the ESC, legislation and NRP implementation programmes in the socio-economic field form the subject of ESC opinions or reports. For example, the ESC has drawn up opinions on the following topics: the Spanish sustainable development strategy, the law on the social security reserve fund, the law for the protection of consumers and users, the statute of self-employed workers, the law on worker information and consultation, the land law, the equality law, and so on. It has drawn up reports on the cost and income structure in the primary sector, the role of young people in Spain's production system, the business start-up process, occupational inequalities and active employment policies, immigration and the labour market, the effects of EU enlargement on the Spanish economy. In 2001, the ESC drew up an own-initiative report on the European employment strategy, which contained a series of proposals on increasing the potential for creating more and better jobs, training as a strategic factor, the information society, modernising public employment services, social protection and integration, promoting equality, and the participation of social and economic players. It should also be noted that the Annual Report on the socio-economic and labour situation in Spain refers to many of the aspects covered by the NRPs, and includes a specific section on the situation in the EU, with an assessment of the progress made in the context of the Lisbon Strategy.

- 55 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

4. To complete this overview of the NRPs, in the context of initiatives at EU level, it should be

pointed out that the social partners and representatives of organised civil society are represented on the ESC through bodies which in turn are present in the EESC and, often, in EU-wide organisations. EU-level dialogue therefore also involves specific institutions or bodies on this scale, representing organisations which are consulted on the NRPs at national level.

_____________

- 56 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

FRANCE

Present cycle

The involvement of the French Economic and Social Council in the Lisbon Strategy came early: in 2002, it had already announced its intention to try and improve understanding of the process, particularly by enhancing "the opinions it transmits to the bodies responsible for preparing France's positions at the European spring summits". In 2003, it made its first contribution on the topic in a communication entitled Lisbon Process:

contribution of the Bureau based on the opinions of the Economic and Social Council in preparation for the 2004 spring summit ("Processus de Lisbonne: contribution du Bureau à partir des avis du Conseil économique et social préparatoire au Sommet de printemps 2004"). Similar communications were issued in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007. Through this annual communication (drawn up by the delegation for the European Union and adopted by its Bureau) and the ESC's other work on the Lisbon Strategy, it helps to establish the credibility of the strategy among organised civil society. The implementation of the National Reform Programme (NRP), starting in 2005, has formed a key pillar of the ESC's work programme, as it received a long-term referral from the French government to monitor the NRP for its duration. A work system designed in line with the annual cycle of the strategy has been set up, and regular contact established with the Secretariat-General for European Affairs (SGAE), which coordinates France's European policy for the Prime Minister and draws up the NRP and its yearly progress reports. The public authorities noted this involvement in the 2007 NRP Progress Report, welcoming the productive dialogue with the Economic and Social Council that had been maintained for several years.

1) How is the government involving the ESC? Despite the government's very short drafting deadlines, resulting from the requirements set down by the European Commission, the SGAE was able to present the ESC with the main lines of the French NRP adopted in September 2005. In December 2005, the Prime Minister also called for the ESC's thoughts on the implementation of the NRP as part of an ongoing consultation from the government, which represents a significant qualitative step forward. The ESC was requested to draw up a first assessment of the conditions for implementing the goals set down in the NRP. This was completed in May 2006 and included in the ESC's annual opinion on the economic and social climate. In addition, the government called for one or more further opinions to be drawn up every year, throughout the duration of the programme, concerning the implementation and monitoring of one or more aspects of the NRP. It also consulted the ESC on the draft 2006 and 2007 NRP

- 57 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

Progress Reports drawn up prior to the 2007 and 2008 spring summits, before these documents were definitively adopted and sent to the European Commission. A representative of the SGAE made a statement during the ESC's presentation in plenary of its communication on the Lisbon Process: contribution of the Bureau based on the opinions of the Economic and Social Council in preparation for the 2004 spring summit, which sets out its response to the 2007 Progress Report. In 2005, the ESC's work on the subject, which thus far had mainly involved its delegation for the European Union, became a concern for all its sections and delegations. 2) Structure of ESC consultations and information The 2006 and 2007 versions of the draft NRP Progress Report were presented, in September 2006 and 2007, respectively, by the SGAE to the ESC's delegation for the EU. The timeframes set for consultation (approximately three weeks) do not seem long enough given the challenges, diversity and scope of the fields covered by the Lisbon Strategy. By allowing more time for the consultation of Parliament, the ESC, the social partners and local authorities, a wide public debate could be initiated. These timeframes make it all the more difficult to get citizens really interested. In addition to the ESC's opinions on the different aspects of the NRP, the French national institute for statistics and economic studies (INSEE) is represented within the ESC, which enables it to build on certain spheres of information by making use of national statistical systems. There is a need for improvement in the statistical information available to the public in many of the areas covered by the NRP (knowledge of the economic structure, assessment of efficiency of public administrations, measurement of unemployment and under-employment, price changes, purchasing power and inequalities, etc.). The ESC hopes to be informed about and consulted on the results of some of the 150 "modernisation audits" announced in the 2007 Progress Report, as part of the commitment made in the NRP to contribute to the General Public Policy Review (Révision générale des politiques publiques - RGPP). The draft 2006 and 2007 NRP Progress Reports seem overly focused on governmental policy and measures. There is little or no mention of the actions committed by the other players working towards the objectives of the NRP, despite the ESC's comments on this matter. The drafting method adopted for the progress report tends to over-represent the role of the State and public authorities in the implementation of the programme. The lack of involvement of joint social protection bodies in this information gathering and drafting work and the timeframes imposed for consultation mean that these shortcomings cannot be remedied.

- 58 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

3) Consideration of measures proposed by the ESC Every year the ESC adopts around thirty opinions, two-thirds of which fully or partially concern one or more aspects of the Lisbon Strategy. As soon as they are adopted, these documents are transmitted to the government, which may take them into consideration without making explicit reference to them. Although the ESC analyses the follow-up given by the government to its opinions every year, it is not easy to measure the extent to which they are taken into consideration, as this may happen several years down the line, and may not always focus specifically on the Lisbon Strategy. In the 2006 and 2007 NRP Progress Reports, the government did note, however, the contribution of the ESC; the introduction to the 2007 Progress Report highlights that "The productive dialogue with

[…] the ESC […] over recent years continues: on 11 September, the SGAE […] presented the progress report project to the European Union Delegation. In its document (entitled “The Lisbon

Process: a contribution from the Economic and Social Council to the preparations for the Spring 2008 Summit"), the ESC delivered a fully documented commentary on the 2007 progress report." Around fifteen changes to the 2006 NRP Progress Report, in relation to the initial draft submitted to the ESC, line up with remarks made by the ESC. In the 2006 Progress Report, these changes included a reference to measures under the "2007 Hospital Plan", simplification as a long-term policy, and a paragraph on the development of mobility in the context of education and professional development – the ESC having commented on all of these aspects. In the 2007 NRP Progress Report, it is worth noting the reference to the importance of monitoring the implementation of reforms in the long term and boosting the culture of evaluation, as highlighted by the ESC in its contribution, and the point regarding the Grenelle Environment Forum, whose omission from the draft Progress Report had been pointed out by the ESC. In parallel to the Implementation Reports, the government has also sent the European Commission the communications containing the ESC's comments on the 2006 and 2007 Progress Reports. 4) How does the ESC monitor the NRP? and 5) What role do the country-specific recommendations play? The ESC has organised itself so that it can monitor the NRP. A programme setting down around twenty tasks leading to proposals on the different aspects of the NRP was sent by the Bureau of the ESC to the Prime Minister at the end of 2006. In November 2007, fourteen of these tasks had been completed by the ESC and transmitted to the government. Another twenty opinions on subjects included among the priorities of the Lisbon Strategy were adopted by the ESC when the NRP came into force. These include a document on better lawmaking, an opinion on Research and technology of the future: what direction for energy

production and consumption? ("Recherches et technologies du futur: quelles orientations pour la production et la consommation d'énergie") and an opinion entitled What EU budget to boost growth

and jobs? ("Quel budget de l'Union européenne au service de la croissance et de l'emploi?").

- 59 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

Moreover, every two years, the ESC's delegation for the European Union draws up a communication entitled Monitoring the situation in France with regard to the Lisbon indicators ("Suivi de la situation de la France au regard des indicateurs de Lisbonne"). Published in the Official Journal, this document analyses France's performance with regard to the objectives set for the entire EU by the European Council, comparing it with that of the other Member States and highlighting the objectives that France has set for itself in the NRP and the ESC's proposals in order to achieve these goals. The Integrated Guidelines (IG) and annual recommendations specific to France adopted by the European Council are reiterated in this document, and in the annual communication on the implementation of the NRP.

6) In what way does the ESC contribute to public awareness? In its 2006 contribution to the White Paper on a European Communication Policy, the ESC drew attention to France's lack of public awareness about European affairs, particularly the Lisbon Strategy. It stressed that this could be one of the aspects of a campaign to help whet people's "appetite for Europe", provided that the necessary balance is maintained between the economic, environmental and social pillars.

Since 2003, the ESC has given real importance to the Lisbon Strategy in its work, and to analysing its implementation in France, particularly through its specific opinions on topics relating or referring explicitly to the strategy. In an educational context, the key aims of the strategy, its main instruments at European and national levels and the development of the situation in France with regard to the indicators used to measure Member States' progress have been explained and contextualised in various documents aimed at public decision-makers, civil society players and citizens. After a vote in plenary or a decision by the Bureau of the ESC, these documents are published in the Official Journal and then form the subject of synopses designed to boost press coverage and public awareness. They are also covered by press conferences resulting in a variety of articles, often published in the specialist EU press. They are also available for download from the ESC's website. The ESC's involvement in the Lisbon Strategy is noted by the main French bodies monitoring European affairs – the SGAE (with which the ESC works regularly), the French Parliament's delegations for the European Union, and various specialised university departments. This is evidenced by the various works by these bodies or universities which mention the ESC's contributions and role in the field. A number of the ESC's rapporteurs have attended conferences on the Lisbon Strategy. Around twenty information files and data sheets on the strategy have been drawn up by the ESC delegation, aimed at the ESC's members and groups – many of which then distribute them within their own organisations, thus helping to raise the strategy's profile within civil society.

- 60 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

7) Examples of best practice The ESC is organised so that it can respond to the ongoing consultation on the monitoring of the NRP entrusted to it by the government, throughout the programme's duration, and to the very tight deadlines imposed for consultation on the draft NRP Progress Reports. Since 2005, the ESC has submitted around fifty reports to the French government on various aspects of the NRP (broad economic policy guidelines, research and innovation, training, competitiveness, employment, social cohesion policies, energy and environment policy, etc.). The government's attention is therefore constantly drawn to France's progress or problems with regard to the Lisbon strategy, and to the ESC's proposals to overcome these. These main recommendations are then reiterated in the first part of the communication drawn up by the ESC in the context of the consultation on the draft annual progress report, which gives the government another opportunity to take them into account before it formally adopts the progress

report. The second part of the communication makes observations with a view to improving the progress report before it is sent to the Commission. The government therefore receives the ESC's proposals on these subjects, along with substantiated remarks aiming to build on or clarify certain points in the progress reports. Moreover, as emphasised above, since it is not only the task of ministerial bodies to implement the Lisbon Strategy and achieve its goals, the ESC's annual contributions to the draft 2006 and 2007 NRP Progress Reports highlight numerous initiatives in the area from various civil society players: social partners, private firms, chambers of commerce, craftsmen, mutual associations, clubs, social protection bodies, etc.

Next cycle


national ESCs? The future NRP must be a national (not just governmental) reform programme. Before it is adopted, it should be the subject of an extensive consultation of Parliament, representatives of local authorities, social partners and the ESC, representing organised civil society at national level. In order to ensure that European issues are taken on board in the Member States, especially France, the future NRP and annual progress reports should be made a key aspect of the European public debate at national level, within the framework of an agenda that is accessible to all citizens. The timeframe necessary for an extensive consultation (two to three months) should be provided for in the drafting of the NRP, every three years, starting in 2008, as should reasonable yearly timeframes for consultation on future draft progress reports.

- 61 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

Sectoral and regional versions of the Lisbon Strategy could be provided for in each Member State, in order to help the strategy be adopted more effectively and adapt to the diversity of regions and economic sectors. There are two contrasting examples: the efforts needed to bring down the educational drop-out rate among young people vary depending on the region; the percentage of turnover devoted to research is not necessarily the same in every sector.

2) Contacts with similar organisations in other Member States Since 2005, the French ESC has taken part in the Lisbon Strategy subcommittee set up by the EESC at the request of the European Council. This subcommittee brings together EESC members and representatives of the national ESCs and similar bodies of the Member States. A first summary report by the EESC, comprising a contribution from each of the national ESCs, was drawn up in this context and submitted to the European Council in March 2006. In preparation for the 2008 summit, the French ESC has sent its contribution to the EESC on the four topics selected by the European Council (investment in knowledge and innovation, the potential of businesses, especially SMEs, employment for priority groups, definition of an energy policy for Europe). This was incorporated into the EESC's final summary report. With a similar concern for mutual improvement, the rapporteurs for the EESC opinion met with the ESC's delegation for the EU. A joint discussion on Services of General Interest (SGIs) was also undertaken during the first half of 2007 with the Luxembourg ESC in order to adopt a Community regulatory framework encompassing SGIs, to be broken down if necessary into sectoral regulations.

3) What should the priorities be for the next Lisbon cycle in the context of a new

institutional framework? There must be sufficient funds so that the future European budget can support the next cycle of the Lisbon Strategy for growth and jobs through appropriate Community policies, particularly with regard to the investments needed in research and innovation, training and infrastructure. These funds should also make it possible to prepare for the implementation of the EU's environmental commitments and boost European solidarity in the face of globalisation. In the Community programme that it is to draw up, the European Commission should highlight the Community dimension and the initiatives that could boost growth and jobs at this level. Sectoral versions of the Lisbon Strategy (especially in the field of industrial policy) should be provided. For example, the Commission could encourage the Member States to include corporate social and environmental responsibility initiatives in the NRP. It is also necessary to maintain and strengthen the balance between the economic, social and environmental pillars of the strategy, as the synergy they generate is the best way to ensure that EU growth performs to the benefit of society. Certain policies which are not covered by the draft treaty –

- 62 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

such as energy, demographic or educational policy – need stronger participation from civil society players and should be the focus of particular attention from the national ESCs. While it may not be essential to systematically review the integrated guidelines (which are flexible by their very nature, making it possible to focus on SMEs in 2006 and on energy and sustainable development in 2007), an update could enable them to be adapted to the economic context, placing more emphasis on the social dimension, prior to the start of the French presidency of the Council of the European Union. The complementary nature of Community and national initiatives should also be highlighted more strongly: a significant part of the framework programme for research, technological development and demonstration (FPRTD) could, for example, be devoted to joint initiatives, as proposed by the Commission. The aid granted through the Structural Funds (ESF in particular) and loans from the European Investment bank (EIB) should, as an incentive, be more closely linked to the Lisbon Strategy, while showing respect for solidarity and the diversity of the component parts of the Union.

_____________

- 63 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

ITALY

Present cycle

Under Article 7 of Law no 11 of 2005, the prime minister or the minister for EU affairs submits draft Community and European Union legislation of particular economic and social interest (as well as material preparatory to such legislation) to the National Council for Economics and Labour (Consiglio Nazionale per l'Economia ed il Lavoro – CNEL). Under Articles 10 and 12 of Law no 936 of 1986, CNEL can submit any evaluations and remarks it sees fit to the Chamber of Deputies, the Senate and the government. There is also provision for the prime minister or the minister for EU affairs to collaborate with CNEL in organising ad hoc consultation sessions to ensure broader involvement of workers and social partners. Acting under Article 10 of Law no 936/1986, CNEL also examines Community policies and their implementation on the basis of reports provided by the government and to this end maintains contacts with counterpart European and Member State organisations. The government has delegated monitoring of the NRP to the Interministerial Committee for European Community Affairs (Comitato interministeriale Affari Comunitari Europei – CIACE), chaired by the minister for European affairs. The minister, therefore, reports to parliament. In preparation for the second Implementation Report on the Lisbon Strategy (and hence the National Reform Plan) (October 2007), a consultation was held with CNEL on 16 April 2007, during the 11th working session between government and the social partners, at which the main topics were single market reforms, innovation and energy. This was followed on 6 July 2007 by a visit to Italy of the Commission's Country Team, which focused on the strategy's social goals and reforms of the labour market and welfare system, with particular reference to flexicurity. These meetings are mentioned explicitly in the Implementation Report of 23 October 2007. When this report was adopted, the minister for European affairs sent CNEL a supplementary memorandum, entitled "Women, innovation, growth (initiatives for female employment and the quality of work for women in the light of the Lisbon goals)" (Donne, innovazione, crescita (Iniziative

per l’occupazione e la qualità del lavoro femminile nel quadro degli obiettivi europei di Lisbona). CNEL intends to collaborate closely with the ministry on this.

- 64 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

Just as the government consulted CNEL in regard to verifying the implementation of the NRP, so CNEL was consulted on the same basis when the report on sustainable development was being drafted. Again, this collaboration is referred to explicitly in the introduction to that report. Following an agreement with the minister of labour, CNEL has been heavily involved over the past few weeks in promoting and running a series of hearings with social partners, research centres and representatives of national and European institutions. These are aimed at shaping both government proposals and future CNEL action on employment policies and the social goals of the Lisbon Strategy. At a more general level, CNEL central office has looked at the issue in the round and given some useful impetus in documents it has issued (especially studies and proposals aimed mostly at parliament and government) on matters at the heart of Lisbon Strategy implementation. Particularly worth mentioning is the contribution CNEL has made on four subjects which have been highlighted by the European Council and on which the EESC adopted own-initiative opinions this July: "Employment of priority categories", "Investment in Knowledge and Innovation", "Business potential, especially of SMEs" and "The definition of an energy policy for Europe". The documents adopted by CNEL are available at the website www.cnel.it. The regular collaboration between government and CNEL enshrined in law would seem to be extremely useful in both preparation and follow-up stages and is certainly seen as good practice for the government to follow.

Next cycle

• In order to strengthen the involvement of national ESCs, ad hoc meetings could be arranged to monitor implementation of the National Reform Plan at any given stage and particularly to scrutinise the reasons for delays.

• There should be more and better contact with other national ESCs (for example, with the French ESC and the Spanish ESC on the question of immigration in the Mediterranean basin, building on the collaboration begun in November 2006), one of the aims being to pinpoint more closely the priorities that appear, in the light of those set out at Lisbon, to demand immediate joint action.

*

* *

- 65 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

In conclusion, CNEL believes that for the next Lisbon cycle the EESC could further define the priorities to be pursued and propose for some areas the use of reinforced cooperation and a pioneering role for the countries in the Euro area. One reason why this is so important is the need to avoid further delaying a genuine linkage of economic and monetary policies. The rationale here is that meeting the Lisbon goals as a whole requires a backdrop of macroeconomic growth that encourages "investment" in those of the goals geared to creating a knowledge society. This in turn is the key instrument for a policy of competitiveness that avoids the downsides of both social and fiscal dumping and damage to the environment. What is needed here is joint action geared to moving beyond the inability of Member States – for reasons beyond their control – to meet the goals set for 2010 solely on the basis of national subsidiarity. It is important to stress the need to concentrate the (national and European) funding required to achieve these goals. Sectors where a certain threshold for the level and targeting of funding seems to be needed (similarly to the case of R&D spending) could be identified and strengthened. Exempting these interventions from the provisions of the Stability Pact could also be envisaged. The fact is that at times of economic downturn there is some resistance to a stability pact that does not link development to monetary stability and a certain tendency to leave investment and development costs out of the calculation of budget deficits and debt. Faced with the difficulties at national level of designing a fiscal policy that gels with the structure of European Monetary Union, reinforced cooperation – above all within the Eurogroup – can be seen as a way forward.

_____________

- 66 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

CYPRUS It is a known fact that Cyprus has no official body representing civil society. However, especially since Cyprus became independent (in 1960), tripartite dialogue (between government, industry and workers) has been strengthened, by enhancing the status of the Labour Advisory Body and later setting up other advisory bodies. The main tripartite advisory bodies are:

1) Labour Advisory Body This is chaired by the Minister for Labour and comprises the three trade union confederations - ΣΕΚ (Cyprus Workers' Confederation), ΠΕΟ (Pancyprian Federation of Labour) and ∆ΕΟΚ (Democratic Labour Federation of Cyprus) - as well as two employers' organisations - ΟΕΒ (Cyprus Employers and Industrialists Federation) and ΚΕΒΕ (Cyprus Chamber of Commerce and Industry). Members are selected by Cyprus's Council of Ministers on a proposal of the above-mentioned organisations. The Labour Advisory Body meets once or twice a year, when its members give their views on social and employment issues. The government is not obliged to act on its decisions, even if they are adopted unanimously.

2) Economic Advisory Committee This committee is chaired by the Minister for Finance and comprises the two main employers' organisations, the three trade union confederations, the Director of the Central Bank, the Minister for Commerce, Minister for Labour, and former finance ministers. It meets on average once a year to discuss general economic issues. It does not have decision-making powers, but is simply a forum where the social partners express their views. 3) Cyprus Consumers' Association This association is chaired by the Minister for Commerce. It comprises the two employers' organisations; the trade union confederations ΣΕΚ, ΠΕΟ and ∆ΕΟΚ; consumer organisations; ΠΟΒΕΚ (Pancyprian Association of Industry and Retail Professions); ΠΑΣΥ∆Υ (Pancyprian Organisation of Civil Servants); the Pancyprian Supermarkets Association; and a representative of the Commission for the Protection of Competition. The association does not have decision-making powers; it simply expresses the views or positions of its member organisations on all issues that have indirect or direct implications for consumers.

- 67 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

4) Other tripartite committees A considerable number of other specialised tripartite committees exist, e.g. for the environment, rehabilitation of the disabled and equality issues. None of these tripartite advisory committees include members of organisations representing farmers, SMEs or sectoral trade union bodies that do not belong to confederations, e.g.

1. civil servants; 2. teachers; 3. bank employees.

However, they are invited to participate and express their views on the following issues:

1. shop opening hours; 2. level of social insurance contributions and benefits.

The information provided to civil society cannot be considered satisfactory, except in the case of particularly important issues where both trade union and employers' organisations set out their positions. The fact that these bodies do not take decisions reduces media interest in them and consequently the amount of information provided to civil society. The Cypriot government adopts and implements all mandatory EU recommendations and guidelines, but it does not promote implementation of non-mandatory recommendations, either of the European Union or of the EESC. The specific recommendations for Cyprus that were framed by the Commission and approved by the European Council as part of the Lisbon decisions have been discussed during broad consultations chaired by the Minister for Finance, attended by almost all the social partners. The organisations expressed their views and these were recorded in the respective minutes. Discussing the Commission's recommendations on Cyprus in the presence of all the relevant ministers and other government officials, together with civil society – all civil society organisations without exception – proved to be a positive cooperative exercise with substantial constructive results. Any follow-up on implementation would be an integrated and effective undertaking. As well as informing their organisations about the EESC's recommendations and decisions, the Cypriot members of the Committee publish in their press a summary of EESC opinions and recommendations, and try to raise awareness among the general public in Cyprus through articles and other comments in the daily political and economic press.

- 68 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

Since each organisation has its own views on whether or not an ESC needs to be set up, it will be essential to increase the involvement of organised civil society in the temporary committee model set up to implement the Lisbon strategy. Trade union movements and employers' organisations maintain contacts with sectoral European organisations and bipartisan relations with many counterpart national sectoral organisations. The EESC must propose concrete programmes: a) with predefined objectives to effectively manage population ageing and improve the viability of

social security funds, both at national and at sectoral level; b) with concrete goals in relation to knowledge and adequate use of IT and new technologies in

general, in both the professional and personal spheres. An ongoing universal goal is to create a more competitive Europe, providing:

1. better, more permanent and more productive jobs; 2. a higher standard of living; 3. improved quality of life, while maintaining a healthy and human environment.

_____________

- 69 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

LATVIA

1) The implementation of the Lisbon Strategy The National Lisbon Programme of Latvia for 2005-2008 was approved by the Council of Ministers on 19 October 2005 and presented to the European Commission. It was drawn up by the Minister of Economics in cooperation with other government bodies. The work was coordinated by the Supervisory Board of the Lisbon Strategy set up by the Council of Ministers. The Saeima (parliament) and the social partners were also consulted. However, the consultation of organised civil society did not go far enough and did not deliver the hoped-for results. The National Lisbon Programme of Latvia for 2005-2008 is a policy planning document which sets out what Latvia plans to do in the medium term to achieve the stated goal of promoting the country's growth and employment and how it plans to implement the Integrated Guidelines approved by the European Council in July 2005. In order to achieve this goal, the annual GDP growth rate during 2005-2008 should be 6-8% and the employment rate should be increased to 65%. In recent years, Latvia has enjoyed very rapid growth. Since 2004, GDP has increased by 10.4% a year on average. This pace of growth was sustained in 2007, with GDP growing by 11.1% in the first six months of the year compared to the same period in 2006. Owing to its strong GDP growth, Latvia is unquestionably approaching the average level for the EU. Latvia's employment indicators have also improved substantially. In 2006, the employment rate reached 63.3%, i.e. an increase of three percentage points in comparison to 2005. Thus, the country is very close to achieving the target of an employment rate of 67% by 2010 laid down in the programme. Latvia’s priorities to achieve the goals set in the Lisbon strategy have remained the same:

• ensuring macroeconomic stability; • stimulating knowledge and innovation;

• developing a favourable environment for investment and work;

• promoting full employment; • improving education and skills. Approximately 60% of the financial resources granted for the 2004-2006 programming period of the Structural Funds are earmarked for implementation of the Lisbon Strategy. The priorities established by Latvia's National Lisbon Programme for 2005-2008 correspond to the following priorities laid down in the Single Programming Document: • first priority: Promoting sustainable development, outside assistance for investment in the

environment; • second priority: Fostering entrepreneurship and innovation; • third priority: Developing human resources and promoting employment;

- 70 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

• fourth priority: Enhancing the development of agriculture and aquaculture, activities encouraging investment in agricultural enterprises, improving the processing and marketing of agricultural products, promoting the revival of rural areas, and education.

Though several strategic documents have been drawn up in Latvia on the basis of the Lisbon Strategy, the tangible measures needed to achieve the stated goals are yet to be taken. We agree with the European Commission's that the strength of Latvia's national programme lies in the fact that it focuses on reform in the area of research and development, aimed at creating an institutional environment conducive to innovation, fostering cooperation between the scientific community, the world of education and the private sector, supporting knowledge and technology transfer, and promoting innovative technologies and products. Accordingly, there is a need to increase funding. Latvia should make more determined and resolute efforts to ensure macroeconomic stability, particularly fiscal consolidation, formulate policies to strengthen the partnership between, on the one hand, research and training bodies and, on the other hand, the business community, devise more practical measures that would bring education more in line with the needs of the market and also develop and implement a life-long learning strategy. 2) The role of organised civil society The implementation of the Lisbon Strategy and the definition of priorities is the subject of social dialogue, at national level, with organised civil society. Latvia has several organisations, federations and councils which contribute actively to debates on economic and social issues with the Saiema (parliament), the country's executive and local authorities: they put forward their proposals on draft laws and regulations and policy programming documents by participating in the work of various committees and working groups set up by the State and perform a role, at national level, in the economic and social sphere similar to that of the EESC at EU level. In Latvia, civil society organisations and employer and employee organisations are registered and function in the form of NGOs, unions, associations, confederations and independent councils, while the committees operating under the aegis of the Council of Ministers and various ministries are set up by instruction of the government institutions concerned. Among the organisations and councils active at national level, mention can be made of the Free Trade Union Confederation of Latvia, the Latvian umbrella body for disability organisations SUSTENTO, the Latvian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the Cooperation Council of Farmers' Organisations, the Council of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises and Crafts, the National Tripartite Cooperation Council, the Economic Council, the Platform for Cooperation between NGOs and the Council of Ministers, the Confederation of Latvian Employers, and the Council of Foreign Investors in Latvia.

____________

- 71 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

LITHUANIA

Present cycle

During the period of preparation of the National Reform Programme (NRP), the Government and, to a certain extent, its Ministries actively discussed the Lisbon Strategy with social partners. Many activities were organised during the preparation period, initiated by the Government and the Ministries, in particular the Ministry of the Economy which is responsible for the implementation of the programme and the consultation work. Lithuania does not have an Economic and Social Council, however there exists a Tripartite Council, made up of representatives from employer's organisations, trade unions and governmental organisations, primarily the Ministry of Social Security and Labour. The Tripartite Council is not very involved in the consultations on the Lisbon Strategy and the NRP, which generally take place directly with organisations. However, if the matter is related to activities of the Ministry of Social Security and Labour or to social dialogue matters and labour law, then the Tripartite Council is very active and the results are quite positive. The consultations are not structured, but the member organisations of the Tripartite Council, such as the Lithuanian Confederation of Industrialists and the Trade Unions, are keeping a close eye on how the NRP is implemented, especially in relation to the Lisbon targets. The organisations are very active in this regard and their representatives are invited to the Tripartite Council meetings to present their work. As regards some concrete examples of reforms carried out by the Government, there has been a reduction of income tax from 27% to 24%, and an increase in the minimum wage, both very important for workers and organisations. The Tripartite Council initiated the draft law on business social initiatives which could help social partners in developing their policies relating to social corporate responsibility. As regards the recommendations proposed by the European Commission, Lithuania is encouraged to strengthen the science and technology and research and development base and to increase spending in these areas, to strengthen innovation, to better define labour-market policies and to promote mobility within the labour force. There is plenty of on-going debate on these issues, and the governmental institutions hold regular consultations with social partners.

- 72 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

The Spring Council in 2006 set the following four priorities:

• Investment in Knowledge and Innovation

• Increasing business potential for SME's

• Increasing employment possibilities

• An effective integrated energy policy.

All four priority areas are being debated in the Tripartite Council. In the case of the third priority, increasing employment possibilities, the employment situation in Lithuania is such that there is actually a shortage of labour, with social partners and governmental institutions, in particular the Ministry of Interior Affairs and Foreign Affairs, debating how to encourage the immigration into Lithuania of foreign skilled workers. As regards an effective integrated energy policy, this is considered to be a very important question for Lithuania, a country which does not possess many natural resources. It is clear that an effective and integrated energy policy is needed. The early stages of the preparation of the NRP took place in cooperation with national stakeholders and social partners. Gradually the attention to the social partners diminished somewhat. For the next cycle it would be beneficial if the same engagement with stakeholders as occurred in the beginning of the first cycle could be maintained during the entire process.

Next cycle

The Tripartite Council does not have contacts with other organizations dealing directly with the Lisbon Strategy and the four priority areas. However, cross-border contact should be established. It is very important to share experiences, and all available means should be used: conferences, video conference and other communication possibilities. The Lithuanian Confederation of Industrialists and other organizations with a similar orientation do cooperate when the government is not able to help these organizations to achieve their goals. The aim is to contact similar organizations in different countries, to learn from the exchange of examples in order to be able to present positive solutions to the government. For the next 3 year cycle, it is important to promote innovation and the implementation of new and advanced technologies in production. The promotion of research and development is also very important. The task of the Tripartite Council's member organizations is to cooperate with similar, partner organizations in other countries.

_____________

- 73 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

LUXEMBOURG

1) Involvement of the ESC and social partners in the Lisbon Strategy

- Since 2004 the ESC's organic law has required it to issue opinions on the various stages of drawing up the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines (BEPGs). The refocusing of the BEPGs on the Lisbon objective has required the ESC to issue opinions every year on the Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Jobs, which it did for the first time in its opinion on the guidelines of 15 May 2005, previous opinions having focused on the BEPGs. The 2005 opinion looked at the new governance cycle 2005-2008. The 2006 opinion was limited mainly to comments on the Commission's assessment of the National Reform Programme entitled National Plan for Innovation and Full Employment.

Its most recent opinion of 3 October 200715 on the Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Jobs (2005-2008), bringing together the BEPGs and the employment guidelines, the ESC adopted a different approach. It evaluated the performance of the European Union and of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg with regard to the Lisbon strategy and analysed the merits and weaknesses of the Lisbon strategy.

- On 5 July 2007 the ESC, as in 2006, held an exchange of views on the implementation of the National Reform Programme in Luxembourg with representatives of the European Commission and those responsible at national level for the coordination of the Lisbon strategy in the various ministries and the Competitiveness Observatory.

The Competitiveness Observatory16, which is responsible for coordinating the Lisbon strategy and for its implementation in Luxembourg, develops analysis instruments and statistical indicators (Lisbon structural indicators) in order to be able to evaluate the progress made.

- In April 2006 the Tripartite Coordination Committee, which brings together the government and the social partners, adopted a package of measures on controlling inflation, re-establishing a balanced budget, the establishment of a number of additional tools to promote business competitiveness, improving the situation on the labour market, introducing a single status for employed workers and social security measures, particularly with regard to the consolidation of pensions insurance schemes.

15 See www.etat.lu/CES.

16 www.odc.public.lu.

- 74 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

The background to this agreement was the feeling that it should not be forgotten that competitiveness is not an end in itself. It is merely an instrument for achieving a longer-term objective; the (social) welfare of the people, the ability of a country to improve the living standards of its people in a sustainable way and to offer them a high level of employment and social cohesion, whilst conserving the environment.

- The revamping of the Commission's reform plan via the revision of the strategy carried out in 2005 has meant a reorganisation of governance aimed at involving the social partners at an earlier stage in the implementation of this coordinated action and in the realisation of the objectives. The changes made to date have, however, had more to do with form than with substance. There has been no discussion of the content of the policies implemented or of the appropriateness of laying down new guidelines.

- At national level, it is, as in the past, important that the National Plan for Innovation and Full Employment, which derives from the Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Jobs adopted in Brussels, should be the result of discussion between the parliamentary bodies, the social partners and ordinary people, in order to ensure that it is supported and owned by all stakeholders. The ESC has asked that a debate, involving government and the social and civil dialogue platforms, be initiated before the national action programme is finalised. The final programme should be drawn up by the Council of Government in consultation with the social partners before being submitted to parliament.

- The conclusions of the report on the implementation of the National Plan for Innovation and Full Employment were also discussed in committee by parliament.

2) The ESC's assessment

- Whilst it is undoubtedly difficult to distinguish that part of the progress made on implementing the Lisbon objectives which is due to cyclical factors from that part which is due to structural reforms, the ESC has nonetheless pointed out that this kind of difficulty is not specific to Lisbon strategy policies, but is, rather, intrinsic to all policies. In general terms, the ESC thinks that one of the merits of "Lisbon", partly expressed through the open method of coordination (identification of objectives, establishment of a common system of statistics, benchmarking of performance and exchange of best practice) is the fact that it encourages political cooperation between the Member States in areas which are, at least partially, national prerogatives. However, the new mode of governance remains complex. Transparency has not improved and the number of reports required has not diminished.

- 75 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

The application of a similar method to all policy areas threatens to result in incoherent national strategies: some Member States will have a tendency to focus more on objectives which they are likely to achieve in the short term rather than engage in serious reform in other sectors. In view of these debates, there would appear to be five factors which determine the success or failure of Lisbon: � adoption of the strategy, particularly by the "big countries"; � the addition of a macroeconomic approach for the euro area; � the identification of clearly defined priorities, such as education and the continued integration

of markets; � a clearer role for the EU (European budget, internal market) within the limit of its powers; � the need for coordination between states.

- The reform of the Stability and Growth Pact and the Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Jobs were intended to give a new impetus to the European project. This has resulted in substantial progress on the integrated European market, and in the beginnings of the modernisation of the European social model with the aim of making it more effective. The pursuit of new dynamism in the European economy must not compromise the fundamental elements of the European social model. The social dimension of Europe, comprising the social dialogue, collective negotiation and worker protection and participation, must not be considered as an obstacle to competitiveness and economic efficiency because it can, in a fundamental way, promote innovation, productivity and sustainable growth. The European social model must be recognised as a productive factor in relation to implementation of the Lisbon strategy.

- Whilst welcoming the greater clarity that the integration of the guidelines has brought, the ESC believes that a policy debate on the Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Jobs should be conducted at the earliest opportunity at European level with a view to the new three-year period 2008-2011. Implementation of the Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Jobs does not seem sufficient to achieve all the objectives of the Lisbon strategy, although much has been accomplished, particularly since their recasting in 2005. Although the ESC has reaffirmed that the essential structural reforms must improve operation of markets and ultimately boost the competitiveness of European firms, structural reform of the labour markets must nonetheless continue to help improve the situation of both businesses and workers. This requires the strengthening of human capital, ensuring that more and more workers have access to skilled jobs, which are synonymous with stability, social cohesion and higher pay.

_____________

- 76 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

HUNGARY

Present cycle

1) How is the government involving the ESC?

In this regard the Hungarian ESC played an exemplarily “pro-active” role. Together with the EESC, we organised a joint international conference on 9 and 10 March 2006 under the title: “Improving national ownership of the Lisbon Strategy: Is organised civil society sufficiently involved?” The genuinely international group of speakers gave the Hungarian participants (who included several representatives of various government departments) an insight into how other Member States involve their civil societies and what the strengths and the weaknesses of the individual experiences are. This conference proved to be instructive not just for Hungary but for the other Member States as well.

Prior to this conference, in December 2005, the “Mr Lisbon” in the Hungarian government made a first step towards the ESC: his department organised a one-day conference on the National Reform Programme, at which the ministers of the departments responsible for the individual “chapters” of the Programme delivered the keynote addresses. In the following sections, representatives of various NGOs and employers’ and employees’ organisations as well as researchers commented on the first draft of the NRP.

After the Hungarian government submitted the renewed version of the NRP in 2006, the Standing Committee of the ESC drafted a six-page list of comments on it.

However, in the autumn of 2007 the government did not consult the Hungarian ESC. It decided to select the National Interest Reconciliation Council17 as the main partner. The ESC was not contacted by the department responsible for the revised NRP.

2) Does the ESC get enough information? Looking through the whole process, we are not satisfied with the amount and—first of all—the timing of the information we receive. In the light of on the expertise built up by the members (not to mention in the organisations represented by the members) of the ESC, a more regular co-operation, in the spirit of genuine partnership, could be expected. The government department with primary responsibility for the NRP circulates the draft once it has been completed. The representatives of organised civil society need to be involved in the earlier phases of the work.

17 It should be noted that the National Interest Reconciliation Council comprises representatives of the employers’ and employees’

organisations and each of them (i.e. the same persons) are also members of the ESC. The NIRC focuses more on everyday business, whilst the ESC is a body which deals primarily with national programmes of strategic character. This may explain why the government preferred the NIRC to the ESC in this particular case.

- 77 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

3) How are the consultations structured?

When the draft document has been completed, the government requests selected organisations and bodies18 to submit their comments. These comments are then published in full on the website of the National Development Agency, accompanied by the individual letters in which the officials explain which remarks and comments they have been able and willing to accept and which ones they had to turn down.

The main problem of this partnership is that there are hardly more than a couple of days for the social partners to draft their opinion. In the case of organisations like the Hungarian ESC, which convenes only 4-5 times a year, it is almost impossible to discuss such a programme in its plenary session.

4) What concrete ESC measures were taken into account by your government?

Since we were not consulted this year, we can only cite the comments of the National Interest Reconciliation Council. They were of the opinion that Hungary faces major economic policy challenges: unless it meets balance and growth criteria simultaneously, the economy will irrevocably lose ground and be unable to catch up with its EU competitors. The opinion was that sustained budget balance can only be achieved by an economy which is capable of growing out of trouble, i.e. whose output can finance state duties at the level demanded in 21st century Europe. Accordingly, it considered that insufficient action was being taken to stimulate the economy. To counterbalance the negative effects of restoring macroeconomic stability, the social partners consider that more attention must be paid to supporting small and medium-sized enterprises, especially considering their crucial role in increasing employment. In addition, funds need to be allocated for proper implementation of the new Science, Technology and Innovation Strategy. They pointed out that in order for EU funds to be properly used, national funds were essential and points of contact had to be established between the various financial sources. As regards employment, there was criticism of the low level of funding for active labour market policy. Also, despite steps taken in the education field (mainly in the field of vocational training), it was felt that there is a need for further restructuring to make the educational system capable of meeting the demands of the labour market.

18

The unsolicited opinions of any other organisations or individuals are also welcome and are dealt with in the same way.

- 78 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

5) How does the ESC monitor the NRP? Each year, the ESC invites the minister responsible for the revised NRP to one of its meetings but no regular monitoring activity is carried out by the ESC itself. The ESC has seven delegates in the 21-member National Development Council, alongside seven representatives of the regions and five outstanding academics. The Council is chaired by the prime minister and the vice-chairman is the minister responsible for EU support and the Lisbon Strategy. The ESC was consulted on the long-term development concept (2005-20), and the NSRF and its operational programmes (2007-13) which are of outstanding importance in the implementation of the revised NRP. 6) In what way does the ESC contribute to public awareness? The ESC participated in and itself organised several conferences on the Lisbon Strategy. The ESC has very limited resources to contribute to public awareness but its members (especially those who are also members of the EESC) regularly, as speakers at various conferences, call the public's attention to the Lisbon agenda. A major contribution of the Hungarian ESC was, however, that in 2007, when hosting the annual meeting of the presidents and secretaries-general of the ESCs of the EU Member States, it submitted a draft declaration on the human dimensions of innovation, focusing mostly on the requirements of the Lisbon Strategy. This declaration was unanimously adopted in their meeting of 23 November.

7) Would you have examples of best practice that could be used by other ESCs?

The fact that the government agency responsible for the Lisbon Strategy published all comments and criticisms on its website and each and every contributor received an individually tailored answer in writing, which was also made available to everybody, increased the transparency and trustworthiness of the whole partnership exercise. We should recommend the same practice to all Member States.

Next cycle

1) What should be changed in the NRP with a view to deepening the involvement of national ESCs?

There is a need for a clear-cut “road map” of the process of annual revision of the National Reform Programme so that social partners can draw up their calendar to take account of the tasks relating to this co-operation. Selected social partners should be warned well in advance of this task. (We should mention, however, that on the website of the National Development Agency there is a time-table of the expected partnership exercises.)

- 79 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

2) Does the ESC have contacts with similar organisations in other Member States? We have contacts in the framework of our network, which means two meetings per year for the secre-taries-general, one meeting for the presidents plus occasional invitations/attendance at each other’s conferences and seminars. 3) What should the priorities be for the next Lisbon cycle to be presented by the EESC? Given that ESCs form a bridge between nationwide decision-making and civil societies, the EESC should focus on the “human” aspects: such as employment, education, training and R+D. Participation in the monitoring at EU and Member State level could be a major priority.

_____________

- 80 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

MALTA

Present cycle

1) How does the government involve the ESC?

The Malta Council for Economic and Social Development (MCESD) is very much involved in the Lisbon Process, particularly with regard to Malta’s National Reform Programme (NRP). When the first draft was being drawn up in 2005, the NRP National Coordinator discussed the collated material and gave MCESD the opportunity to react and submit its input. MCESD meetings are held in the presence of the NRP National Coordinator on a regular basis in order to discuss the progress achieved. Furthermore, whenever European Commission representatives visit Malta on this issue, they meet with MCESD in plenary.

2) How are consultations structured and does the ESC receive sufficient information?

MCESD receives enough information from the NRP National Coordinator and is continuously kept up to date on the matter. Consultations are structured since these take place during MCESD's plenary sessions.

3) What specific ESC proposals have been taken into consideration by the government? Various proposals were taken into account, mainly concerning the sustainability of public finances, eco-contribution, stipends/grants for University students and training and ongoing learning opportunities for the employed and unemployed.

4) How does the ESC monitor the NRP?

Malta's NRP is monitored on a regular basis by MCESD through its plenary sessions, which take place periodically.

6) In what way does the ESC contribute to public awareness? MCESD makes little contribution to public awareness of Malta's NRP since this falls within the remit of the Ministry for Competitiveness and Communications, however this is mentioned in MCESD's Annual Report, which is tabled before parliament.

- 81 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

7) Examples of good practices which can be used by other ESCs The Consultation process that has taken place over the years is in itself an example of good practice, which is highly recommended to other National ESCs.

Next cycle

1) What should be changed in the next NRP with a view to greater involvement of national ESCs?

It is still too early to state what ought to be changed in the next NRP given the fact that general elections are due to be held in the coming months and the priorities of the new legislature are as yet unknown.

2) Does the ESC have contacts with similar organisations in other Member States? Yes, MCESD has contacts with other ESCs in Member States and participates regularly in the EESC horizontal group made up of EESC Members and National ESC representatives.

3) What should the EESC present as priorities for the next Lisbon cycle?

At present, it appears that greater emphasis could be placed on environmental and economic issues.

_____________

- 82 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

NETHERLANDS Introduction The Dutch Social and Economic Council (SER) has expressed a generally positive view on the National Reform Programmes (NRPs) as an important contribution to the implementation of the Lisbon strategy. As early as 2004 the Council advised that the European and national policy agendas should be better coordinated. This was based on the finding that national policy-makers generally did not consider implementation of the Lisbon strategy to be their responsibility. The SER therefore made

the following recommendation19:

In this respect, the Council proposes drawing up a national action plan aimed at achieving the Lisbon strategy. The plan should specify which Lisbon goals apply to the Netherlands,

how they are to be achieved, who is to do so, how and when. Such a plan will make the Lisbon strategy more transparent and promote cohesion; in addition, the Member States, the

Netherlands included, will be more likely to conduct themselves as “problem owners” if they have defined their own Lisbon goals.

Present cycle

1) How is the government involving the ESC? 2) How are the consultations structured and does the ESC get enough information? In the Netherlands the government involves the social partners in the Lisbon process and in complementing the National Reform Programmes in two ways. The first way is through the Labour Foundation (Stichting van de Arbeid), the body bringing together the central employers' and employees' organisations and traditionally the body for discussions between the social partners and the government. This occurs twice a year, during the spring and autumn discussions. In the course of the spring discussions the government consults the executive body of the Foundation about its view of the forthcoming EU spring summit. At the end of June a delegation from the European Commission visits the Foundation to discuss topical issues. The discussions are attended by officials of the Dutch ministries concerned. The Dutch government also gives the Foundation the opportunity to react to the approaches adopted in the National Reform Programmes and the National Report on Strategies for Social Protection and Social Inclusion (NSR).

19

SER opinion Evaluating the Lisbon Strategy, 18 June 2004, p. 11. For the English summary see: www.ser.nl/~/media//Files/Internet/Talen/Engels/2004/2004_10.ashx.

- 83 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

The Labour Foundation itself draws up a progress report every year on the contribution of the social

partners to achieving the Lisbon objectives with a view to this annual monitoring process20. This contribution is made primarily via the social partners' own policy on labour conditions, which incorporates the Foundation's recommendations. The advice on social and economic policy provided to the government by the Labour Foundation and the Social and Economic Council also contributes to

the achievement of the Lisbon objectives21. The annual progress report, together with a brief summary of relevant Foundation and SER activities, is appended to the Dutch government's National Reform Programme. Apart from providing advice on specific aspects of the Lisbon agenda, there is an annual discussion at the SER with a government representative responsible for the Lisbon strategy. This discussion takes place at the beginning of the calendar year and focuses mainly on the Dutch contribution to the spring summit. 3) What concrete ESC proposals were taken into account by your government? A considerable number of Lisbon-related recommendations from SER opinions, have been incorporated into government policy. Probably the most striking of these is the recommendation, set out in an SER opinion (of October 2006) on medium-term socio-economic policy, that a participation

rate of 80% should be aimed for by 201622. As autonomous growth would otherwise produce an estimated participation rate of around 75% in 2016, this will require a substantial additional effort. Against this background the Dutch government, the Labour Foundation and the Association of Netherlands Municipalities (VNG) concluded an agreement on 27 June 2007 to put the SER recommendation into effect. The progress of implementation will be monitored annually. The results of this will be placed on the agenda of the regular spring discussions between the government and the social partners.

20

The most recent progress report of the Dutch social partners, covering the period 2006/2007, was drawn up in autumn 2007. For

the English version see www.stvda.nl/default.asp?desc=en_main.

21 In the field of economic and social policy the SER is the main policy adviser to the government; in addition to the social partners,

it consists of independent experts with a wide range of academic and social backgrounds. The Labour Foundation and the SER are housed in the same building. Where this is possible and useful, the secretaries of the two organisations work closely together. This happens, for example, during the preparation of the Dutch social partners' annual progress report on the achievement of the Lisbon objectives.

22 SER opinion, Welvaartsgroei door en voor iedereen (Increasing prosperity by and for everyone), 20 October 2006. For an

English summary see www.ser.nl/~/media//Files/Internet/Talen/Engels/2006/2006_08%20pdf.ashx.

- 84 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

Ambitious agreements on participation objectives In order to achieve the ambitious 80% participation target by 2016, the government and the social partners have drawn up an ambitious agenda. The implementation of this agenda is also of great importance for the achievement of the Lisbon objectives. The agreement sets out three major strategic challenges:

− increasing the effective supply of labour to counter the risk of both cyclical and structural bottlenecks on the labour market and to increase public support for prosperity-orientated policies;

− creating opportunities for vulnerable groups to improve economic participation and social cohesion;

− improving the adaptability of the labour market and responding to the new needs arising from an ageing society and the challenges of globalisation and technological change.

4) How does the ESC monitor the NRP? The annual contribution of the social partners to the progress reports on the National Reform Programme offers the Labour Foundation the opportunity to monitor implementation of the Lisbon strategy in the Netherlands. The situation with regard to the Lisbon objectives is also often the subject of SER opinions on specific issues. 5) What role do the country-specific recommendations, proposed by the Commission and

endorsed by the European Council, play in the discussions taking place in your country? For the Netherlands the European spring summit of 2007 had one recommendation: improving the supply of labour, in particular involving women, older workers and vulnerable groups. The agreement between the Dutch government, the social partners and the Association of Netherlands Municipalities, referred to in point 3, specifically sets out to put this recommendation into effect. 6) In what way does the ESC contribute to public awareness? The SER tries to raise public awareness of its views through the media, conferences and public appearances by its president. Where the Lisbon objectives are relevant, these are often the starting point of SER opinions.

- 85 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

7) Would you have examples of best practice that could be used by other ESC's? For foreign observers it might be interesting to see how sustainable energy policy is developed in the

Netherlands23. This "energy transition policy" requires, inter alia, the renewal of government: improving cooperation between government, market players and social organisations, but also that of parties within the government. Thus the government is by no means the only player in the transition process, but it does play a pioneering role. The government provides direction in a process dominated by uncertainty, complexity and interaction. It provides a stimulus, creates the right conditions, brings stakeholders together and ensures that agreements are complied with. Another interesting example is the knowledge investment agenda 2006-2016, set up in 2006 on the initiative of the innovation platform, and involving stakeholders. The organisations represented at the SER have endorsed this agenda. The knowledge investment agenda involves a strategy which identifies challenges in the areas of education, training, research and innovation, and entrepreneurship in a coherent way, and provides a targeted planned approach. The strategy consists of both institutional measures and the use of both public and private resources.

Next cycle

1) What should be changed in the next NRP in view of deepening the involvement of

national ESCs? Under the current procedure a Commission delegation visits the Netherlands half way through the year. During the visit discussions are held, inter alia, with social partners and environmental organisations. It would be worth considering also holding a discussion with an SER delegation, to complement the discussion which the SER holds at the beginning of the year with the responsible minister. 2) Does the ESC have contacts with similar organisations in other Member States?

The Dutch SER maintains close contacts with the Flemish ESC. The two councils hold a joint conference fairly regularly. There are also contacts via the EESC, via the annual meetings of the presidents and secretaries-general of the European ESCs and via the network of the International Association of ESCs and Similar Institutions.

23

A description of Dutch energy and climate policy and the role of the various stakeholders in this is included as an appendix to the

EESC opinion on European energy policy.

- 86 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

3) What should the EESC present as priorities for the next Lisbon cycle? There are two possible approaches. The first approach relates to the process. Are there best practices? The results of this questionnaire could serve as a basis for this. One problem with this approach is that institutional differences between the Member States are large, which means that useful examples are often difficult to apply in a different context. The second approach relates to content. The current EESC project attempts to develop specific themes in depth. The success of this depends on national contributions. The number of national contributions has been limited. One possibility would be to develop individual themes in much greater depth by focusing on best practices and discussing these. Obviously, in the EESC context, it is important to involve civil society fully in the selection of themes. Possible questions are: Where have interesting alliances come into being? What can we learn from this? The Commission's experience with the NRPs could perhaps be helpful here. Input could also be obtained from stakeholders outside the direct ambit of the EESC. Moreover, best practices do not necessarily have to originate in one of the Member State. The possibility of cooperation with the OECD could also be considered, for example.

_____________

- 87 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

AUSTRIA

Present cycle

1) How is the government involving the ESC? Due to the informal structure of the Austrian ESC (full name: Beirat für Wirtschafts- und Sozialfragen - Advisory Council for Economic and Social Affairs) it is not the council as such that is involved, but instead the four major representative social partner associations that are its members (the Austrian Federal Economic Chamber, the Federal Chamber of Labour, the Austrian Confederation of Trade Unions and the Austrian Chamber of Agriculture) [Wirtschaftskammer Österreich, Bundesarbeitskammer, Österreichischer Gewerkschaftsbund, Landwirtschaftskammer Österreich]. The replies set out below therefore do not relate to the council, but to the four social partner associations. 2) How are the consultations structured and does the ESC get enough information? The Austrian social partners were involved in drafting the national reform programme, and in the first two implementation reports for 2006 and 2007. Although some of the social partners' suggestions were taken up in the report, key demands were ignored. The social partner organisations were also represented at the talks held by the European Commission in Vienna to prepare the 2005 national reform programme and the annual implementation reports for 2006 and 2007. Technically speaking, consultation takes place through invitations to interministerial meetings and the scope given to the social partners to put across their views as documents are being drawn up. The social partner organisations are also represented at the annual Lisbon survey conducted by the Federal Ministry of Economics and Labour. 3) What concrete ESC proposals were taken into account by your government? The four social partner associations put forward a whole series of initiatives to further the Lisbon strategy for growth and employment, which were to some extent coordinated within the ESC. These include, amongst others:

• Agreement on fundamental principles Austria 2016, October 2006: http://www.sozialpartner.at/sozialpartner/BadIschlDeklaration_2006_09_05.pdf

• The labour market – the future 2010 (Arbeitsmarkt – Zukunft 2010), October 2007: http://www.sozialpartner.at/sozialpartner/20071001_Sozialpartner%20MaßnahmenpaketArbeitsmarkt_vorläufigeEndversion.pdf

• Education, an opportunity (Chance Bildung), October 2007: http://www.sozialpartner.at/sozialpartner/ChanceBildung_20071003.pdf

- 88 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

• The macroeconomic policy and the Lisbon strategy of the European Union (Die makroökonomische Politik der EU und die Lissabon-Strategie), 2005: http://www.sozialpartner.at/beirat/publ/publ_online.htm

• Key elements of the above ideas were summarised in a joint paper by the social partners entitled Growth and full employment (Wachstum und Vollbeschäftigung) (December 2006), which includes proposals for the coalition agreement of the new federal government:

http://www.sozialpartner.at/sozialpartner/paper_Wachstum_Beschaeftigung.pdf

Many of these recommendations were incorporated in the government programme for the 23rd legislative period: http://www.bka.gv.at/DocView.axd?CobId=19542 4) How does the ESC monitor the NRP? and 5) What role do the country-specific recommendations, proposed by the Commission and

endorsed by the European Council, play in the discussions taking place in your country? In its country-specific recommendations, the European Commission highlights a number of important points which require special attention in Austria (Points to watch). The social partners too fully support the calls made, for instance, to implement a comprehensive strategy for lifelong learning, reduce the gender-based segmentation of the labour market, and improve childcare provision. As already indicated under point 3, the social partners have set out their views on the further development of lifelong learning in Austria in a joint paper containing eight concrete benchmarks. These are partly based on the EU benchmarks, but also go beyond them. The paper also includes eight measures which the social partners consider to be key building blocks for the implementation of a comprehensive strategy of lifelong learning, and which they believe should be incorporated into the national strategy. 6) In what way does the ESC contribute to public awareness? By conveying the message that the Lisbon Strategy helps to accelerate important reforms at national and EU level, that the strategy is not an end in itself and that the measures contained in the strategy are aimed at boosting growth and employment and safeguarding the distinctly European economic and social model in the globalised business world. At the same time, the social partners also seek to draw attention to shortcomings in the strategy and bring about appropriate changes. 7) Would you have examples of best practice that could be used by other ESCs? The Austrian social partners try to ensure the government takes appropriate action to support the Lisbon strategy, and actively strive to come up with joint solutions. The second implementation report for the Lisbon strategy commended these efforts. The social partners thus make a significant contribution to the implementation of the Lisbon strategy, especially in the areas of flexicurity (for example, the new rules on redundancy payments [Abfertigung Neu]), consolidation of basic and, in particular, further training, and moves to boost the entrepreneurial culture in Austria.

- 89 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

Next cycle


national ESCs? Given the tradition of social partners working together in Austria, their formal involvement in the national reform programme, and in its implementation, is seen as a positive step. 2) Does the ESC have contacts with similar organisations in other Member States? The ESC has contacts to other ESCs and similar institutions through the interactive network of ESCs in the EU. One of the ESC's two secretary-generals is a member of the EESC. 3) What should the EESC present as priorities for the next Lisbon cycle? The employers' view is that the priorities in the new set of integrated guidelines should essentially remain the same. However, more attention should be paid to implementation. The same applies to the renewal of the Community Lisbon programme. Country-specific recommendations and the points to watch for each country appear in any case to be very worthwhile and should be maintained. The employees' view is that the upcoming Lisbon cycle should pay more attention to the social dimension of the strategy (balanced flexicurity strategy, specific social guidelines, such as further development of minimum standards, etc.), and should also focus more on implementation. At the same time, critical questions should be asked as to just how effective some of the guidelines actually are.

_____________

- 90 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

POLAND

1) Introduction The Polish National Reform Programme (NRP) for 2005-2008, which is geared towards implementing the Lisbon Strategy, was adopted by the Polish government on 27 December 2005 and then forwarded to the European Commission. The minister for the economy (known as "Mr Lisbon") is responsible for coordinating the Lisbon process and implementing the NRP reforms. The government has also drawn up an NRP implementation document, which it adopted on 17 October 2006. The document sets out an implementation timetable together with the expected impact of individual measures and includes quantitative and qualitative indicators. It also indicates the government departments and offices which are responsible for implementing these measures. As part of the system for monitoring the implementation of NRPs, Member States draw up annual reports. The Polish government adopted its report on the first year of implementation on 13 October 2006 and forwarded it to the European Commission. The 2007 report was adopted by the government on 11 October. 2) Key information on the Polish NRP The 2005-2008 National Reform Programme for the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy in Poland (NRP) is the Polish government's main strategy document, outlining a set of key reforms which must be implemented if Poland is to sustain a high rate of economic growth and create jobs. Implementation of the NRP reforms is having a positive effect on the country's social and economic development, creating the right conditions to meet the challenges of globalisation and enabling Poland to make full use of the development opportunities arising from its membership of the European Union (EU). Given the broad scope of the reforms, a considerable amount of analytical and legislative work is required as well as a consensus on the proposed changes which is acceptable to all stakeholders in the social dialogue. This final condition specifically concerns reforms affecting the whole of society – key examples include changes to the pensions system, healthcare and the labour market. Implementation of the NRP began almost two years ago. In the first year, progress was limited but in 2007 reform was stepped up following the conclusion of analysis in selected areas. This was essential if the legislative process was to be properly prepared and the right solutions implemented. It should be pointed out that the priority has been to introduce reforms which have the biggest effect on bringing about structural change, both on a macroeconomic level (public finances, labour market) and a microeconomic level (e.g. support for innovation).

- 91 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

The main focus of reform has been in the following areas:

− system of public finances – under the current NRP, wide-ranging reforms of the sector have been drafted and implemented in part (based on both legislative and procedural solutions); these measures have resulted in more efficient and effective management of public funds and sound convergence plans;

− pension system – the solutions being drawn up will curb public spending in this area while at the same time ensuring an appropriate level of State support for older people and those unable to work;

− promoting innovation – the various solutions set out in the law to promote innovation (in particular credit to promote technology and tax exemptions) are increasingly being adopted by businesspeople;

− regulation reform (better regulation) – current measures are designed to reduce some of the red tape and are helping government to produce better-quality laws;

− introducing competition into the electricity sector – current measures (including the introduction of TPA and ending long-term contracts) are putting in place the conditions for a competitive market in electricity and natural gas;

− development of transport infrastructure – current measures are leading to better road and rail links, which is, among other things, making Poland more attractive to investors;

− public employment services – the reforms that have been adopted are designed to establish uniform standards in labour market services for the jobless and employers and to help job centres to provide an individualised service;

− development of human capital – current measures are helping to create a legislative and institutional framework for lifelong learning and include tools offering direct support for those who benefit.

At a government forum, considerable emphasis was placed on linking the 2007-2013 cohesion policy to implementing the goals of the renewed Lisbon Strategy. It should be pointed out that, in accordance with the 2007-2013 national strategy framework, Poland had agreed that 64% of its EU funds will be set aside for the Lisbon goals. Pro-Lisbon measures under the cohesion policy programmes focus on the following areas: modern energy and transport systems linked up to European infrastructure networks, freeing up potential for competitiveness and innovation, particularly of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), high-quality R&D work, effective investment in knowledge and innovation and modern education and vocational training systems, increasing capacity to adapt to changes in the labour market, modern public employment services and effective tools for an active labour market policy. Implementation of these reforms is consistent with the national recommendations for Poland adopted in 2007 and helps to meet the priorities set out in the conclusions of the European Council of March 2006.

- 92 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

3) Involving the social partners Both the NRP and documents on the implementation and monitoring of the programme are discussed with the social partners and placed in the public domain. The system for implementing and monitoring the NRP was spelt out in the NRP implementing document, and during the reporting period the essentials of the programme were implemented. However, certain problems were identified (relating, among other things, to the start of work on drawing up the 2008-2010 programme document), which required changes to be carried out. As a result, certain alterations have been made and new solutions drawn up which are helping the system to operate more effectively, including:

− a new, simplified system of quarterly reports on the implementation of NRP measures,

− an additional reports system relating to key reforms, whose implementation will determine whether Poland meets its national recommendations and fulfils the priority tasks identified in the Council conclusions of March 2006 and 2007 – reports on these measures are compiled on a monthly basis and relevant information is submitted to the government for approval.

In order to ensure effective coordination, regular meetings are held for ministers and heads of government departments responsible for carrying out specific tasks. These are supplemented by meetings of a working group, whose members (department directors) coordinate the implementation of the NRP in particular government departments and offices. Furthermore, in connection with the NRP report, a working group was set up at the Ministry for the Economy, whose members include socio-economic partners, members of Parliament and representatives of government departments and offices involved in implementing the NRP. The group carried out social consultations on the report, which helped in the preparation of the document and strengthened dialogue with socio-economic partners on the implementation of the renewed Lisbon Strategy. The working group is also tasked with drawing up draft guidelines for the 2008-2011 NRP. The working group's schedule includes several meetings to discuss the areas and extent of the reforms to be implemented in 2008-2011. These draft guidelines will be used to prepare a document at government level. Promotion and information measures are another part of the process of involving the social partners in the implementation of the renewed Lisbon Strategy. In 2005-2007 several conferences were held on the subject and the NRP website has been improved. It has now been made separate from the Economy Ministry's website and is regularly updated with key information on the NRP's implementation and the renewed Lisbon Strategy. The site also allows interested parties to take part in the discussions on the NRP.

- 93 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

4) Tripartite Commission on Socio-Economic Affairs and the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy

In March 2006, the Tripartite Commission on Socio-Economic Affairs decided to begin drafting a social contract on the themes of economy – work – family – dialogue. The aim of the social contract was to establish a development model for the Polish economy which countered the negative effects of globalisation and the ageing population by maintaining a high rate of economic growth linked to the creation of new jobs, with due consideration for the principles of sustainable and balanced development. It was established that there should be agreement between the government and social partners, inter alia, on an economic model geared towards promoting and maintaining the growth of competitive, innovative enterprises capable of providing an appropriate number of high-quality jobs while at the same time respecting the economic, social and environmental principles of sustainable and balanced development. The Tripartite Commission's task forces worked on key socio-economic aspects of the contract, including: job creation, employment policy and labour market bodies, conditions for socio-economic development and entrepreneurship, social protection (including preventing social exclusion), family policy, healthcare, dialogue, social partnership and civil society. The government's proposal for the negotiations was drawn up by the social contract inter-departmental group, which was set up especially for this purpose. According to the timetable for the social contract, adopted in April 2007, work on the agreement was due to be completed in December of that year. However, owing to the tense political situation, which – in the view of the social partners – was hampering serious debate on solving key economic and social problems in the spirit of dialogue and consensus, work on the social contract was suspended in September 2007. It was thus also decided that as soon as the political situation had stabilised (following the October Parliamentary elections) the government and social partners would take a decision on how to proceed.

_____________

- 94 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

PORTUGAL

Portugal has taken many initiatives as regards the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy at national

level. Best practices in the four priority areas include24:

POTENTIAL OF FIRMS, PARTICULARLY SMEs "Empresa na hora" (Create a company within the hour) - This initiative is designed to facilitate the creation of companies and cut back the red tape involved; since July 2005, this has been able to be done in a "one-stop-shop" and without delays. Between July 2005 and May 2007, a total of 28 007 companies were set up in this way. In the same period, 15 850 companies were created through the 11 Centres for Business Set-ups (Centros de Formalidades das Empresas - CFEs). "Marca na Hora" (Create a brand within the hour) – This initiative was adopted in August 2006 and allows a company set up under the "Empresa na hora” scheme to obtain a pre-approved, pre-registered brand. Previously, this was a lengthy process, sometimes taking up to 16 months to complete. The Simplex Programme – The Administrative and Legislative Simplification Programme – aims to modernise public administration, make people's lives easier, give businesses the speedy response they need to boost competitiveness and growth, and give new impetus to the country. Many of the measures adopted apply to SMEs. INVESTMENT IN KNOWLEDGE AND INNOVATION Vocational training – The "New Opportunities" programme implemented in September 2006 seeks to reduce the low school achievement and early school leaving rates in Portugal, which give great cause for concern and jeopardise development, national competitiveness and Portugal's ability to be a frontrunner in the international economy. The number of vocational courses provided in schools was increased from 3 300 to 5 000 in 2006-2007 in an attempt to bring training provided into line both with young people and their families'

24

The full text of the contributions can be found under http://eesc.europa.eu/lisbon_strategy/esc-contributions/index_en.asp.

- 95 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

expectations and with the needs of the labour market. In this way, the Portuguese government aims to provide a million members of the workforce with skills by 2010.

International cooperation – The Portuguese and Spanish governments approved the creation of the International Iberian Nanotechnology Laboratory (LIN), following a decision by the XXII Portugal-Spain Summit in November 2006. The creation of this international, intergovernmental scientific body, with its head office in Portugal, is part of the country's policy of fostering and accelerating scientific and technological development and attracting more scientists and high-level technological capacities internationally. The creation of the LIN also opens a new stage in scientific and technological cooperation between Portugal and Spain, and in the joint endeavour by the two countries towards progress on an international scale. Scientific cooperation – The Portuguese government has facilitated the conclusion of cooperation agreements and partnerships with a number of prestigious universities, planning joint research into emerging technologies, to be carried out in the framework of post-graduate research and education in the areas of digital content, advanced forms of computing and mathematics. The universities include, in particular, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the University of Texas (UT Austin). INTEGRATION OF PRIORITY GROUPS INTO THE LABOUR MARK ET New Opportunities (second chance) Initiative – The aim of this initiative is to raise average educational levels by bringing back young people and adults who left the Portuguese educational system at an early age. The aim where young people are concerned is for the 12th year of school education to represent the minimum threshold for all; for adults, efforts will focus on on-going training and certification of skills. Another aspect of this move to upgrade secondary education, offering technological, vocational and occupational training, sometimes on an after-work basis. The number of occupational courses (2005/2006) has risen from 2 571 to 3 334 (2006/2007) and the number of adults receiving training at the New Opportunities Centres has risen steadily from 52 026 (2005) to 88 882 (2006) and 97 260 (2007). Certification for highly-qualified immigrants – Portugal has only recently begun to become a recipient of migration flows. Some highly-skilled immigrants fail to find jobs matching their qualifications, and end up working in sectors such as building, domestic service, catering or agriculture.

- 96 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

The Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation is aware of this fact and the role that civil society can play in this regard, and has since 2005 been running and funding two support programmes for the social and occupational integration of highly-qualified immigrants. The first project targeted doctors, the second focused on nurses. Support included paying the costs of translating documents (diplomas, qualifications and syllabi), provision of book-lists for applicants, grants for in-service training periods in hospitals, intensive Portuguese language courses, and the conclusion of formal agreements with the Ministry of Health to place professionals in National Health Service establishments. Of the 190 immigrants who applied, 161 obtained certificates confirming the equivalence of their qualifications – 106 doctors and 55 nurses – and are now working in the National Health Service.

AN ENERGY POLICY FOR EUROPE Direct solar energy – In March 2007, a photovoltaic power station was inaugurated, occupying an area of 60 hectares and linked up to the National Electricity Grid via a medium-tension power line. This power station is the biggest photovoltaic project in the world installed on private land; it uses 52 thousand solar panels and can supply energy for 8 thousand homes. Although its impact on Portugal's energy balance is no more than symbolic, the 62 MW from the new Moura solar power station sends out an important signal about the changes needed in the country's approach to energy production. Wave energy – It has been calculated that more than 250 km off the Portuguese coastline could be used for the installation of devices to obtain energy from waves. The technology for obtaining energy from this resource is still in an experimental phase, but it is already being tested near Póvoa de Varzim and Viana do Castelo using international cooperation models. A third experimental unit is the pilot power station on Pico Island (Azores) which has a capacity of 400 KW. This project is of Portuguese design, the science being headed up by the Instituto Superior Técnico and involving various Portuguese institutions and companies.

_____________

- 97 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

ROMANIA

A. PRESENTATION OF ROMANIA’S SITUATION FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE ECONOMY AND THE LABOUR MARKET

1) Macroeconomic evolution As against an economic growth of 7.7% recorded in 2006, there was registered a 5.8% increase in the Gross Domestic Product during the first half of 2007 as compared with the same period of the previous year, an increase of about 6,1% being expected for 2007. At the beginning of 2007, the annual inflation rate continued to register a falling trend reaching, in June 2007, a level of 3.8%. In July and October 2007, as a consequence of the extended drought and the worldwide increase in the prices of agricultural products, the dynamic of the inflation rate became more significant. Thus, in October 2007, an increase of 6.84% in prices was recorded as compared with September 2006, which determined the National Bank of Romania to review the inflation target by 1.8 percentage points. Investments increased, their contribution to economic growth being 3.7% (2.6% during the first half of 2006), which have been mainly oriented towards new construction projects representing 50.3% of the total of investments achieved. During the first seven months of 2007, foreign direct investments amounted to Euro 3.473 million covering about 39% of the current account deficit. The current account deficit during the first seven months of 2007, amounting to Euro 8.968 million, is 98.3% higher than that recorded in the same period in 2006. 2) Microeconomic evolution There are 25 SMEs for every 1,000 inhabitants of Romania (as compared to an EU average of 64). The number of SMEs benefiting from the state budget in 2006 was about 2,500 from a total number of 561,000, meaning about 0.4%. In Romania, the rate of SMEs involved in activities with an innovative character is low. Innovation is taken into account in the orientation of the SMEs on the market, but it is focused on the aesthetic aspect of the products, on organisational issues and marketing. The actual level of the technological capacity of the Romanian SMEs is inadequate; there is a small number of business incubators, cluster type structures, a low level of advanced technologies used as compared with the other EU Member States. The half-yearly assessment of the overall situation of the SMEs in Romania for the first half of 2007 indicates the following main aspects: - the business environment index reached a value of 26 points, which indicates a generally

satisfactory development of the business environment (in the first half of 2006 the business environment index had reached a value of 35 points);

- the SME development index had a value of 46 points, which reflects a generally good development of the SME sector due mainly to an increase in the number of trade companies

- 98 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

enrolled in the Trade Register Office (this index reached a value of 27 points in the first half of 2006);

- the entrepreneurial index for the first half of 2007 as compared with the first half of 2006 indicates a satisfactory development of the business environment and of the SME sector.

Although included in the National Reform Plan of Romania, the performances achieved up to the present moment are the following:

• improving the operation of the energy and gas markets;

• modernising the transportation infrastructure by an improvement in the quality of the railway network, modernising and developing airports, the air fleet, harbours;

• upgrading the communication infrastructure and promoting technology information;

• improving the business environment;

• developing the business infrastructure by priority projects with a major impact on information and SMEs' market orientation;

• increasing competitiveness of enterprises and promoting research, development and innovation activity through stimulation of innovative enterprises and technological transfer as well as through programmes for investment stimulation;

• SMEs' better access to financing ;

• sustainable administrating of renewable resources and reducing effects of climate change by concrete procedures in fields such as the environmental infrastructure, biodiversity preservation and waste management, reducing noxious gas emissions.

• increasing efficiency in the energy field through measures such as reducing energy intensity and cutting energy costs, promoting the sources of renewable energy and biofuels.

3) Evolution of the labour market At the end of July 2007, the number of salary earners was 4,749.2 thousand persons, 2.9% higher as compared to July 2006. Important changes have been recorded in the construction sector (11.8%) and in the service sector – hotel and restaurant branch (21.5%) and in the field of financial intermediation (17.9%). Concurrently, a significant reduction has been recorded in the number of employees working in the extractive industries (11.2%) and in agriculture (9.6%). In the first half of 2007, the unemployment rate reached its lowest level since 1990, that is to say 4.7% while the ILO unemployment rate was 6.5%, a level of 0.5 points lower both as compared with the previous half year and with the corresponding period for the previous year. The unemployment rate recorded in September 2007 was 3.9% as compared with the whole active civil population (4.9% in September 2006). The female unemployment rate was 0.2 points lower than that recorded for men (3.8% as against 4.0%). In the period between January and July 2007 the monthly average gross salary was 22.2% higher compared to that registered in the corresponding period in 2006, and real salaries increased by 16.4% as compared to 6.8% in the corresponding period in 2006.

- 99 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

An increasing workforce crisis is recorded on the labour market (higher rates of vacancies) and of the workforce costs as well (in real terms, they rose by about 60% between January 2005 and July 2007).

B. PRESENTATION OF ROMANIA’S SITUATION FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE LISBON STRATEGY

Despite significant progress made over the last years in all assessment criteria established by the Lisbon Strategy, as compared to performances achieved by the other Member States of the European Union, Romania has occupied a medium-level position of performance for the following evaluation criteria: 1. Innovation and research; 2. Liberalisation and fluidisation of the labour market; 3. Entrepreneurial and enterprise development; 4. Employment rate of human resources and social cohesion; 5. Sustainable economical growth. As concerns the first criterion, innovation and research, except for the indicator concerning employment in high-tech services and public expenditures for research and development, the other indicators place themselves below the European average. The main weak points of Romania relate to research and development financed by firms as well as to the number of registered licences. Romania has still registered important gaps as compared with most developed countries (U.S.A., Japan, Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, Great Britain, Denmark, Norway) in the field of aggregate innovation indicators, placing itself however in the area of the countries where gaps are likely to diminish in the future. With the view to implementing the Lisbon Strategy in this field, more strategic documents have been adopted and made operational at national level whose putting into practice are supposed to also lead to the reduction in existing discrepancies vis-à-vis the corresponding assessment criteria mentioned above, thus: - The National Reform Plan of Romania (NRP), worked out in the context of the European

Employment Strategy (revised Lisbon Strategy); - Framework Plan of Measures for NRP Implementation; - National Strategy in the Field of Research, Development and Innovation for the period

between 2007 and 2013 (endorsed by Government Decision no. 217/2007); - National Plan of Research, Development and Innovation II, for the period 2007 - 2013

(endorsed by Government Decision no. 475/2007).

- 100 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

C. SITUATION OF THE SOCIAL DIALOGUE IN ROMANIA 1) Ways of ESC involvement by the Romanian Government As concerns the related legal framework, from the quantitative point of view, the ESC involvement by the Romanian Government has been the following:

Published in the Official

Gazette

With opinions issued by

the ESC

Without ESC opinion issued

Type of act

2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007

Government Decisions

209 135 64 58 103 23 151 32 41

Laws 46 52 22 9 22 3 37 30 19

Government Ordinances

9 17 6 1 12 1 8 5 5

Emergency Government Ordinances

86 40 35 16 27 14 70 13 21

Total 350 244 127 84 164 41 266 80 86

The difference of 266 draft acts in 2005, 80 daft acts in 2006 and 86 draft acts in 2007 (falling under the sphere of the ESC, published in the Official Gazette and not transmitted to be given an opinion by the ESC) is an indication of the way the Government has respected the legal competences of the ESC (established by Law 109 /1997) to be consulted on a compulsory basis by the initiators of draft acts and draft programmes and strategies not embodied in draft acts falling under the ESC field of competence.

2) Ways of structuring consultation and the degree of receiving information

The tripartite social dialogue at national level takes place within:

- The Commissions for Social Dialogue set up at ministerial level (made up of representatives of employers and the trade unions at national level) and then within

- The ESC Sections and Plenary Session.

The ESC Plenary Session is made up by 45 members, 15 members for each category (appointed by the employers’ confederations representative at national level, by the trade union confederations at national level or by the Government, as the case may be).

- 101 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

The ESC permanent sections are the following:

• Section for Economic Development and Restructuring of the National Economy

• Section for Privatisation, Operation and Increase of Competitiveness of the Economic Operators

• Section for Industrial Relations and Wage Policy,

• Section for Social Protection and Health,

• Section for Education, Research and Culture,

• Section for Monetary, Financial, Fiscal and Income Policies.

The degree of receiving information is inadequate bearing in mind the low number of legal acts that have not been transmitted to the ESC for opinion issuing as well the reduced budget allocated to the ESC in the last three years, which limited its activities at the accomplishment, at a minimum level, of its organisational procedures (preparation and carrying on of the Plenum, Bureau and Sections meetings). No funds have been allocated for the hiring of experts, for contracting survey services, for impact analyses, evaluation reports, the employers' and trade unions' representative within the ESC Plenum and Sections providing from personal sources the material and informational support for the ESC members. The degree of receiving information is also limited by the short legal terms provided for the opinion issuing procedure (10 consecutive days from the reception of the request in the case of draft decisions and government ordinances or ordinary laws as the case may be and 20 consecutive days from the request reception for draft organic laws and draft programmes and strategies not embodied in acts). 3) Ways of capitalisation of the ESC proposals by the Government

From the point of view of the capitalisation by the Romanian Government of the opinions, proposals and observations issued and formulated by the ESC, an exclusive interest has been noticed in the quantitative social dialogue and not in the qualitative one, the ESC opinions not being used adequately in most cases.

4) Ways of monitoring the NRP by the ESC Although not involved as a distinct institution in the process of consultation concerning the drawing up of the National Reform Plan, the Economic and Social Council has recently launched a debate on its involvement in the monitoring and following-up of the NRP, so that, starting with 2008 its activities and contributions as well as those of the social partners’ in the achievement of the Lisbon Strategy should achieve a systematic and organised character. It is necessary that the ESC should dynamically follow the review of the Lisbon Strategy at the beginning of 2008 and speedily assume the dissemination of the strategic objectives revised through public hearings organised by the ESC and throughout the information channels of the social partners.

- 102 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

5) The role played by the recommendations made by the European Commission and the

European Council The specific recommendations made by the Commission and adopted by the European Council have an important role in Romania being as a rule capitalised correspondingly, and are called upon by the trade unions and the employers in the framework of the social dialogue at national level.

6) The ESC contribution to the increase in public awareness As an institution, the ESC still makes a limited contribution to the increase in public awareness. The budget allocated to the ESC during the last few years did not provide adequate funds for the organisation of press conferences, publication of bulletins and documents promoting social dialogue, its current activities and those of the social partners. Nevertheless, the employers and trade unions with representatives within the ESC Plenum and Sections managed to organise, from personal funds, press conferences, monthly magazines, and brochures revealing their positions concerning the acts that the ESC has issued opinions on, thus contributing to the increase in public awareness. 7) Examples of good practice established by the ESC that could be used by other ESCs The following good practices can be mentioned: - organising meetings between the representative employers and trade unions and presidents of

political parties; - setting up joint technical commissions (employers and trade unions) for the mutual drawing up

of common positions on amendment of acts (e.g. the amendment of the Labour Code) under the ESC's auspices.

D. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR THE FUTURE I. CONCLUSIONS The problems Romania has to tackle are much greater, more complex and more difficult than those most of the European countries are confronted with as they are generated by the particularly complex overlapping economic transformations (strengthening of the functional labour market, integration in the European Union and building of the knowledge-based economy). To get over the discrepancies and solve its problems, Romania needs to achieve a professional management at national level, implement rational and coordinated national policies able to determine effects in the depths of economic, innovation, educational, cultural and social mechanisms, with the following priorities:

- 103 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

- pre-eminence of the national interest in the conception and implementation of strategies and

plans of actions; - intensive consultation and involvement of social partners in the policy-making process and the

achievement of strategic objectives; - promotion of public-private partnership as an axis of the national strategies operation; - correlative approach of economic and social aspects starting from the pre-eminence of the

economic factors, accentuated social dimension of the economic activities and strong conditioning of the economic performances by the social factors;

- providing strong formative and innovative dimensions of the economic and social activities ; - conferring a strong practical and effective character to strategic decisions and actions through

positive concrete effects and actions meant to maximise them; - including all branches of activity and all regions and counties within the area of strategic

actions. The necessity to support the growth of economic competitiveness, mostly in the period between 2007 and 2013, which represents the first stage in the post-accession process, imposes on Romania the essential requirement to have technological gaps reduced and surpassed with priority granted to achieving a competitive and dynamic economic environment able to assimilate and develop high technology fields and answer the strategic long-term development needs in the context of a knowledge – based economic global evolution. The capacity and competitiveness of the system of research, development and innovation has to be increased at national level, support programmes for initiatives on the establishment of scientific and technological parks, clusters, spin-offs and business incubators should be promoted, new firms in the industrial branches with high development potential in Romania (IT, electronics, fine mechanics) should be created, the SMEs’ access to consultancy in marketing, management, development of programmes of vocational training in critical professions should be increased in the rural areas.

II. PERSPECTIVES

1) Measures for strengthening the Economic and Social Council of Romania As a consultative body, the ESC has the task of supporting the social consensus for issues of national and international interest. ESC activity has to be carried out so that it can reach the objective of social prosperity in the broad sense of the word, based not only on economic but also on social progress, on a superior quality of the environment we are living in. Through all that it does, the ESC is supposed to be aware of and express the signals coming from the society it represents thus providing the social partners with the opportunity to express their opinions and contribute their specific expertise. The ESC has to play the particular role of representing a forum where the representatives of the civil society can put forward their points of view and proceed to discuss them.

- 104 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

In this respect, it would be necessary that: - the flow of the legislative process and all legislative acts should be observed and all legislative

acts should be transmitted to the ESC for the issuing of an opinion; - the quantitative social dialogue should be completed by a qualitative one and a sense of

responsibility to public authorities be provided in this regard; - meetings of representatives of ministries and those of the specialised sections should be

organised in order to identify priorities in the different fields; - the ESC budget and the allocation of revenues for the achievement of all its legal attribution

should be increased; - cooperation partnerships should be established with well-known specialised institutions both in

Romania and at European level; - partnerships for exchanges of expertise between the ESC of Romania and similar institutions of

other Member States should be encouraged. - both public and private resources should be attracted for a good development of ESC activity

which also includes a coherent policy in the human resources field; - the ESC should acquire greater visibility in national and international public life. 2) The ESC and International Relations The ESC takes part in activities organised by the European Economic and Social Committee, is a member of the International Association of Economic and Social Councils and Similar Institutions and cooperates with the other ESCs in the EU Member States. In the period between 2004 and 2006, the ESC was the beneficiary of the Project of Institutional Twinning RO03/IB/SO/03 -“Promoting autonomous social dialogue”.

3) Priorities proposed for the future Lisbon cycle a. focus on a reduced number of objectives selected from the point of view of their priority :

improvement of the business environment (decrease in the administrative burden and simplification of the legal framework), increase in the level and quality of employment in Romania, support for SME development, modernisation of labour relations, creation of macroeconomic stability, support for research, development and technology, establishing targets at European level and realistic deadlines adjusted to each EU Member State's particularities.

b. concentrate on the central objectives of the ESC’s activities, in accordance with the provisions

of the Lisbon Strategy, on the support for policies able to provide: - a balance between economic growth and sustainable development; - increased employment; - promotion of a system of a fair distribution of revenues.

- 105 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

c. accelerate the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy at national level through plans worked out three times a year and whose implementation should be monitored by the national economic and social Councils along with the European institutions; the monitoring by the national ESCs will generate a positive revalorisation of the ESC position in the national institutional equation.

_____________

- 106 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

SLOVENIA

The government of the Republic of Slovenia adopted the Reform Programme for implementing the Lisbon Strategy, which is based on the Development Strategy for Slovenia (SRS), in October 2005. The document was at that time also discussed in the Economic and Social Council (ESC). However, the social partners felt that they were involved too late in the debate on these matters which were very important to them and that they should have had input into the decisions on its content. Two years on, there has been a clear improvement in the situation. However, before we set out some concrete examples of the Economic and Social Council's involvement in the implementation of the Reform Programme, we need, for the sake of easier understanding, to explain how the ESC works. It is a tripartite body: alongside employers and unions, it also includes representatives from the government. Thus, as a rule, the ESC discusses all legislative proposals and other documents on subjects within the ESC's remit even before they go to the government or parliament for adoption; it also and has varying degrees of influence on their content. Whilst it is true that this principle is occasionally not adhered to, social dialogue in Slovenia has reached a point where this happens less and less, and consensus in discussions on key issues has become the rule rather than the exception. Thus, for example, on the most important matters concerning employment, health or pensions legislation, negotiations continue until consensus is reached between all three parties. This working method of the ESC also enables the social partners to be involved in the debate on all the main measures of the Reform Programme for implementing the Lisbon strategy. Returning to the current state of affairs, the last two years have seen major progress as regards involvement of the social partners in the preparation of and decision-making on key legislative and other measures aimed at achieving the Lisbon strategy goals. This was demonstrated inter alia in the discussions on the report on the implementation of the Reform Programme for 2006 and 2007, which provide an annual review of progress in implementing the priority tasks, measures and goals of the reform programme. Whilst the social partners were quite critical of the 2006 report, they were rather more satisfied with the discussions on the 2007 report, both with the report itself and with the implementation of the priority tasks in almost all areas. Among the successes, the first that should be mentioned is the consensus reached on the changes to the law on working conditions, which represent a step towards the introduction of flexicurity. Consensus was reached after a year's negotiations between the government, employers and unions. The most significant changes are greater internal job flexibility, a broader legal basis for the application of flexible working arrangements and more effective arrangements for terminating employment contracts, as well as shorter notice periods. An important step in the involvement of the social partners was taken with the signing of the new social compact for the period 2000-2009. The draft agreement was initialled after long negotiations in late July 2007, and was signed in early October 2007. The agreement represents a satisfactory balance between the necessary reform measures and the interests of the social partners. It provides the basis

- 107 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

for further measures in the areas of public finance, social dialogue, the tax system, a competitive economy and faster economic growth, employment and the labour market, pay, education and lifelong learning, social security, pensions and invalidity benefits, and a number of other areas. For each of these areas, the social compact also sets out a series of tasks, both for the government and for the social partners, aimed at achieving the desired goals and following the guidelines set down. One of the most important sections of the compact is, in the social partners' opinion, the part dealing with wages, which will rise in real terms in the period to 2009. Both inflation and productivity will be taken into consideration when coordinating this. At the September meeting of the Economic and Social Council the social partners were briefed on the latest progress report on the Reform Programme for implementing the Lisbon Strategy in Slovenia. They agreed that the document accurately described the implementation of the Lisbon programme, but representatives of both employees and employers again pointed out that greater and more active involvement of all the social partners would be needed in the preparation of the next reform programme. Some of the comments made and concerns raised by employees' representatives in the discussions on the report are set out below:

- they did not agree with the report's finding that the introduction of the euro, which they had supported and also contributed to, did not lead to price rises/inflation. Moreover, wage increases had not kept pace with rising inflation;

- the assertion that the wage rises they were calling for would increase inflationary pressures was, in their view, unsound;

- the agreement on the new social compact was an important step forward, but the report placed too little emphasis on its content and its role in achieving the Lisbon goals;

- employees played an active part in social dialogue and put forward numerous proposals, and also opposed some of the government's proposals; this was not made clear in the report (for example, the unions opposed the first proposal for tax reform, above all the introduction of the single tax rate and the lowering of tax rates for the highest earners);

- changes were needed to the law on the minimum wage; all the social partners had to work to reach agreement on this;

- they welcomed the promotion of flexibility and mobility on the labour market, particularly along the lines of the new law on working conditions;

- decisions on the privatisation of large and strategically important companies in Slovenia should only be taken after thorough consideration; in this sphere, the government had to take into account the 2000 directive on employee consultation, as the state was responsible for ensuring that the interests of employees and jobs were protected as much as possible;

- doubt was expressed concerning the level of funds allocated for an active employment policy; - the number of company scholarships provided by employers had fallen significantly in recent

times, but the report did not pay enough attention to this problem or to how to solve it; - the report mentioned that the law on the coordination of social transfers had been adopted, but did

not mention that the unions had opposed this or why;

- 108 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

- it rightly called attention to youth employment, and quoted proposals from the social compact. In this context, too little was said about the fact that young peoples were worse off mostly because of widespread short-term employment (e.g. self-employment), but there was also too much temporary employment, which was bad for the labour market;

- with regard to the first of the two recommendations from the Commission, the employers believed that the existing pension reform from 1999 was producing good results and that no more changes to the pensions system were needed for the time being. In any case, there should be no changes in this domain without the involvement of the social partners, and incentives to work longer should consist exclusively of carrots, not sticks. With regard to the second recommendation, they agreed with the government's response.

The employers have broadly welcomed the report and supported it, though they consider that some changes are taking place too slowly. As regards the activities aimed at achieving the Lisbon goals, it should be stated more clearly that the social partners, not just the government, deserve credit for achievements in this area. For example, the Slovenian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (GZS), as early as March 2006, drew up its own programme for achieving the objectives of the reform programme and has been active in the following fields: education, advisory services, internationalisation, steps to link large and small businesses, regional coordination, the promotion of business and commerce, etc. The employers have also emphasised that the new social compact is an agreement between all the social partners, which was not sufficiently emphasised in the report. The other main comments made on the employers' side were:

- government measures and action to reduce red tape and to improve the operation of support bodies were praiseworthy. However, these were not enough to stimulate the growth of small and medium-sized enterprises. It was also necessary to provide appropriate financial support, particularly for the purpose of securing risk capital for growing and developing businesses;

- a major problem for the development of businesses and small craft industries was the high price of land. In particular, there were still not quite enough suitable industrial sites;

- they agreed that a fair amount had been done in the area of taxation, but the changes were not far-reaching enough. Too little had been done for the small business sector. In addition, several representatives from different chambers of commerce highlighted the abolition of tax relief on investment;

- the agreement on and adoption of the law on working conditions was not enough to improve the efficiency of the labour market. They pointed out that the emphasis of the new law was mainly on employee mobility within businesses. This did not allow sufficient flexibility. In particular, small businesses would not notice the changes;

- in the area of education, some changes were effected by the adoption of the law on vocational and specialised training. Vocational training for young people needed to be more closely linked with work, as a shortage of such workers increased the pressure to use foreign workers, which was not a long-term solution. Other types of education were also inadequately integrated with the economy;

- in the last two years, the Slovenian Chamber of Craft Industries had done a lot to link up scientific and research institutes with the relevant departments of the chamber, but this should be backed up with appropriate projects so as to maintain these links in the long term;

- 109 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

- with regard to consumer protection, the efforts undertaken by civil society and the Slovenian government were going in the right direction.

In any case, an example of good practice is the social compact, the fourth since the establishment of the Economic and Social Council in 1994. Of course, such practices in other countries depend on the composition and working methods of their ESC, its characteristics, traditions, how developed civil society is, etc. Models cannot be blindly copied, however successful they may be in some countries. Each of the social partners in Slovenia will keep up their efforts to maximise their investment in all the activities within their remit, so as to help ensure that the Lisbon goals are implemented as quickly and as effectively as possible, thus contributing to prosperity for all. This aim is shared by the government which, in December, published the eagerly-awaited law on profit sharing for workers, to which the ESC – following prior consultation with the social partners – gave its full support.

_____________

- 110 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

SLOVAKIA

Present cycle

1) How is the government involving the ESC? The Slovak Economic and Social Council (Slovak ESC), as the representative of organised civil society in Slovakia, seeks to cooperate closely via the departments of the responsible deputy prime-minister of the Slovak government. This takes place through regular consultations and an extensive exchange of views and ideas. 2) Does the ESC get enough information? The Slovak ESC obtains the necessary information from its own sources – from the Slovak members of the EESC, by receiving information directly from the EESC, as well as from the relevant departments of the Slovak government. 3) How are the consultations structured? Consultations take part at the level of the president, vice-presidents and secretary of the Slovak ESC. 4) What concrete ESC measures were taken into account by your government? In 2007, the main focus was placed on consultations on social progress, and on structuring mutual relations. 5) How does the ESC monitor the NRP? The ESC fully monitors the NRP through consultation. 6) In what way does the ESC contribute to public awareness? The Slovak ESC helps raise public awareness by adopting opinions and exchanging views by way of a social and economic forum.

7) Would you have examples of best practice that could be used by other ESCs? The Slovak ESC is in the process of drawing up its own individual procedures and, for this reason, will be examining all examples of best practice from other organisations.

- 111 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

Next cycle 1) What should be changed in the next NRP with a view to deepening the involvement of

national ESCs? Monitor the significant increase in the number of civil society organisations. 2) Does the ESC have contacts with similar organisations in other Member States? The Slovak ESC has contacts with all national ESCs. 3) What should the priorities be for the next Lisbon cycle to be presented by the EESC? Broad exchange of experience with individual Economic and Social Councils.

_______________

- 112 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

FINLAND

Present cycle

1) How is the government involving the ESC? The government presents draft versions of the NRP and its updates for comment and discussion at the Economic Council. The ESC role in discussing the Lisbon Strategy as well as other issues of that kind is strongly affected by the rather unique nature of the Finnish Economic Council. The Council is a body where both various organisations of civil society and the government are represented, and of which the Prime Minister is chairman. As a result, the Council does not formulate public statements on government policies (or any other matters) but discusses them confidentially. The feedback from civil society takes the form of direct comments to the key ministers and an interactive exchange of views about the issues at hand.

2) How are the consultations structured and does the ESC get enough information? Members of the Council (ESC) can freely express their views on and suggest amendments to the draft versions. As the Prime Minister and several other ministers are present in the discussion, the government receives very direct feedback from the representatives of organised civil society. 3) What concrete ESC proposals were taken into account by your government? The members of the Economic Council were quite satisfied with the draft programme. Only a few amendments were proposed. As a result of the discussion at the Economic Council, some aspects of adult education were given more visibility in the programme. Also the creation of a new ministry that will replace the current Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Trade and Industry was taken up in the NRP. 4) How does the ESC monitor the NRP? The Council discusses recent national performance in the light of the NRP objectives. In this discussion, the country-specific recommendations by the European Council are considered, if necessary.

- 113 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

5) What role do the country-specific recommendations, proposed by the Commission and

endorsed by the European Council, play in the discussions taking place in your country? The country-specific recommendations are an important addition to the Lisbon process. They have been duly noted by those in close contact with the national structural reform process, including the social partners and other major civil society organisations. However, their role in the reform discussion in Finland has not been central due to the fact that the recommendations are rather limited and softly formulated. In order to have a real impact, the Commission should take a much stronger stance on its feed-back to the Member States, based on reliable statistics, and organise exchanges of best practices in order to learn from country-specific experiences.

6) In what way does the ESC contribute to public awareness? The Finnish Economic Council does not issue any public statements in its own name. Therefore it does not discuss the NRP in public either. The organisations represented in the Council do, however, discuss issues related to the Lisbon Strategy in various ways. The link from the ESC to the public goes through the organisations that are represented on the Council, and their communication with their broad membership and media. This has been the main channel to increase public awareness of the NRPs. The secretariat of the Economic Council has contributed to the public discussion on the Lisbon agenda mainly through its reports. In 2006 the Secretariat carried out a major study on the challenges globalisation poses to the Finnish and European economies, and how policy could best respond to these challenges. In other reports, some key issues of the Finnish reform agenda have been discussed. For example, the analyses have focused on the consequences of population ageing for public finances, ways of improving public health, and the problems of labour market mismatches in a tightening labour market. The reports usually get a good deal of coverage in the media.

7) Would you have examples of best practice that could be used by other ESCs? The reports published by the secretariat are drafted by independent experts and academics to provide up-to-date and objective information to form the basis for discussion at the Council. The confidential nature of the discussions at Council may help to find ways to deal with difficult issues where compromise is needed.

- 114 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

Next cycle


national ESCs? The main challenge of the Lisbon strategy and the NRPs as a part of it is still, clearly, implementation. In the case of Finland this is particularly true for reforms on which interests and views are divided. The involvement in structural reform of the Economic Council and the organisations represented on it, in particular the social partners, is by tradition strong in our country. Clearer and more outspoken feed-back and recommendations as a part of the process could help to focus the debate on the most crucial needs for reform. 2) Does the ESC have contacts with similar organisations in other Member States? The contacts with similar organisations in other Member States are largely maintained by the secretariat and are predominantly multilateral through participation in the EESC initiated co-operation (meetings of the presidents and the secretary generals, CESlink etc.) In some instances bilateral co-operation at the level of the secretariat may take place.

3) What should the EESC present as priorities for the next Lisbon cycle? We agree with the Commission's view that the present four priorities of the strategy are fully relevant for the next cycle. The EESC has already presented an Opinion underlining the importance of integrating the issue of climate change into the strategy. This important proposal is, in our view, fully in line with the present priorities, supporting the importance of the fourth of the present priorities and presenting an additional aspect to the others. As the Lisbon strategy serves the globalisation process, due attention should be paid to the challenges that working life is facing, in order to strengthen the competitiveness of companies by improving the quality of work, productivity and innovations, and in developing flexicurity in the Member States. Another issue to be underlined, within the scope of the present priorities, is the external dimension of the strategy, also proposed by the Commission.

_____________

- 115 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

SWEDEN Sweden does not have an Economic and Social Council but it does have a long tradition of consulting civil society organisations through a referral process whereby the government asks the organisations concerned for their views in connection with the drawing up of reports and government proposals. These organisations may also be represented in commissions of inquiry and special commissions, and they may also be asked to make known their views at government or parliamentary hearings. In many cases Swedish organisations have their own networks of various kinds but only in exceptional cases do civil society organisations take a common stand on an issue. In June 2007 the Swedish government invited a large number of organisations to take part in a consultation on Sweden's national action programme for growth and employment and the 2007 follow-up report, with a special emphasis on three questions:

• What can the organisations do to contribute to achieving the strategy's aims and objectives in Sweden?

• How can their efforts attract wider support among players at national, regional and local level?

• How do organisations think the strategy should be developed so that it is conducive to sustainable growth and high employment?

About 80 organisations took part in the government consultation and some twenty or so written contributions were submitted. In November 2007 the EESC held a hearing in Stockholm where a large number of organisations were invited to put forward their views on the action taken at national level to implement the Lisbon Strategy (National Reform Programme – NRP). The Committee's aim was to obtain a clear picture of the situation in a country which does not have a national economic and social council or committee. The majority of the organisations took part and presented their positions. Håkan Jonsson, State Secretary at the Prime Minister's Office, outlined the government's efforts to implement the Lisbon Strategy. Some of the contributions made at the hearing are set out below.

Position of employer organisations (Confederation of Swedish Enterprise) The advantage of the Lisbon Strategy is that it puts growth and competition issues not only at the centre of the debate but also at the centre of work within the Commission. The Confederation of Swedish Enterprise and the activities of employer bodies in the field are consistent with the Lisbon Strategy and aim to highlight the need for reform and identify the sectors where the economic climate should be improved. The Confederation believes that a future Lisbon agenda should focus on finding ways of improving the functioning of the labour market, for example

- 116 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

through flexicurity and modernised labour law. There is a need to ensure that the necessary skills are available and immigration should be geared to guaranteeing the supply of labour and skills. In particular, the EU should develop and better monitor "Employment Guidelines 17-24". As regards the process itself, the EU should strengthen monitoring of the strategy and methods for improving implementation. In the view of the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise, implementation is essentially about Member States being bold enough to reform certain aspects of economic and labour market policy (given that the EU has a joint responsibility for the external dimension in this field) and to work for free trade both externally and internally. In addition, it believes that the Better lawmaking initiative should be implemented and that it is important to continue to improve the effectiveness of the internal market. Position of trade union organisations (Swedish Confederation of Professional Associations – SACO. Representatives of the Swedish Trade Union Confederation (LO) and the Swedish Confederation of Professional Employees (TCO) were

unable to attend) The reform of the Lisbon Strategy in 2005 was heavily criticised by the ETUC on the grounds that it pushed social and environmental issues into background to the benefit of growth and employment. Swedish trade union organisations did not agree with the view that there had been such a major, definitive shift of emphasis and therefore were not as critical as other European trade unions. The big problem was that the Lisbon Strategy had become overloaded with key objectives. Two Swedish trade union organisations also took part in the high-level groups headed by Wim Kok. The partners contributed jointly to drafting the text of Sweden's national action plans/reform programmes. But there is no undertaking to discuss the questions set out in them in future negotiations. The partners describe what we have achieved and what is consistent with the strategy and the guidelines. The texts were negotiated beforehand between the organisations and, for the most part, the government then incorporated them as they stood (e.g. the Swedish cooperation agreement on industrial development and wage formation) in its report to the Commission. However, there was one year where the partners failed to produce a joint text. The three most recent reports have examined various aspects relating to labour market "adjustment agreements" and job security issues. In this context, we have been able to highlight the practical provisions in these agreements which are designed to contribute to "flexicurity" – an aspect which both the Commission and other Member States should pay attention to. We increasingly see references made to these agreements. Challenges ahead for the Lisbon process and work in this area:

• Stepping up cooperation between negotiators and "EU politicians" in connection with the organisation of the labour market.

• The Swedish Parliament must devote more time to discussing the Lisbon Strategy and Sweden's reform programme.

- 117 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

• Steps must be taken to increase government authorities' awareness of and attachment to the Lisbon Strategy.

• There is a need for greater engagement by local and regional authorities. Good examples here are the initiatives taken by the Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions.

• Conclusion: it is up to all of us to ensure that the work undertaken with regard to the Lisbon Strategy does not become the preserve of the political elite.

Other civil society organisations (Swedish Farmers Federation – LRF, The Swedish Consumer Association, The Swedish Disability

Federation - HSO, Swedish European Women´s Lobby, National Organisation for Help to Narcotics and Drug Addicts - RFHL, Cooperative Development, Swedish Union of Tenants, Swedish Adult

Education Association) Through presentations and contributions to debates, these organisations have put forward numerous arguments for the need to involve civil society organisations fully in the drawing up of National Reform Programmes in Member States. The government asks the organisations for their views on the subject but does not take sufficient account of their positions.

• The Swedish Farmers Federation (LRF) set out its own vision on higher growth and employment in a document entitled Vi får landet att växa, which argues that farmland and forests form the foundation for the development of not only traditional industries but also new business opportunities through increased entrepreneurship. Priority should be given at national level to simplifying rules governing business activity.

• For there to be a mobile and flexible labour market, there must also be a social and flexible housing market which takes into account the needs of young people, integration, demographic change and urban renewal.

• Social differences are growing, poverty and exclusion are on the increase and a large number of children live in poverty. There are deficiencies in the social welfare model and the Lisbon Strategy does take adequate account of them. Social enterprise should be given a greater role with regard to matters relating to labour market integration.

• Social organisations are taking on greater responsibility. The influence of voluntary bodies is waning but the Lisbon Strategy is an instrument that could be used to mobilise all parties by laying down clear and readily understandable rules for cooperation between these organisations and public authorities.

• There is a need to recognise that the development of the cooperative form of enterprise offers one way of improving competitiveness and employment. Cooperative societies must be allowed to operate under the same conditions as other types of enterprise.

• Skills development needs to be enhanced through life-long learning. The Swedish system of broad-based popular education accessible to all, through so-called study associations, constitutes a good model in this regard.

_______________

- 118 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

UNITED KINGDOM

PRIORITIES FOR THE SECOND LISBON CYCLE 2008-2011 1) Delivering Employment Opportunity for All 1.1 In response to the Lisbon goals for securing more and better jobs and social cohesion in order

to deliver employment opportunity for all, the UK National Reform Programme (NRP) published in 2005 has the objective of promoting work as the best form of welfare for people of working age while protecting the position of those in greatest need. The UK has already exceeded the Lisbon targets for overall figures, female employment figures and older workers. However the government is committed to reducing the gap in employment rates between disadvantaged groups and the rest of the population which ranges from 26.9% for disabled people to 3.2% for older workers (between 50 and state pension age).

1.2 The UK government is concerned about the proportion of young people aged between 16 and

18 not in education, employment or training, (known as NEETs). Its aim is to reduce the proportion of this age group by 2 percentage points by 2010. An important role in this will be played by the devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and by Local Authorities. Local Authorities in particular are being asked in the United Kingdom to work in partnership with the Learning and Skills Councils to offer an attractive range of learning provision that encourages young people to remain in learning up to the age of eighteen. Skills acquisition is also at the heart of the Northern Ireland Executives' strategy to help people find work and improve the skills of the workforce in line with the needs of the economy.

1.3 The issue of skills is one identified by the Spring European Council emphasizing the need to

increase basic and intermediate skills, something addressed by the recent British government Leitch Review of Skills.

2) Long Term Reform 2.1 As part of its comprehensive programme of long-term reform aimed at delivering strong and

sustainable economic performance and employment growth consistent with sustainable development and the Lisbon Strategy, the British government's priorities are maintaining macro-economic stability; raising the sustainable rate of productivity growth; providing employment opportunities for all; ensuring fairness by delivering world class public services; and addressing environmental challenge.

- 119 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

3) Micro-economic policies 3.1 Measures to improve productivity are at the centre of the reform agenda in the United

Kingdom. Part of this is regulatory simplification intended to contribute to improving the business environment by reducing the burden of regulation on enterprise. In this, the United Kingdom firmly supports the initiatives of the European Commission and has a representative in vice-president Verheugen's Task Force.

4) Consultation with stakeholders 4.1 Widespread consultation takes place between the national government, the devolved

administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and with national, regional, local and sectoral stakeholders as a matter of course in developing new policies.

4.2 In terms of implementing structural reform policies in the context of the Lisbon Strategy, the

Government has sought the views of a wide range of stakeholders via seminars and web-based consultations. The United Kingdom's update on progress towards the Lisbon Strategy for Jobs and Growth dated September 2007 has benefited from discussions with stakeholders and with the European Commission.

5) The Community Lisbon Programme 5.1 In terms of additional measures to include in the Community Lisbon Programme, the UK

suggests there is scope to add more on the skills agenda. Although education and skills are the responsibility of Member States, one way in which the EU could add value would be through a European skills review that assesses the skills challenge and examines the long-term skills needed and priorities.

_____________

- 120 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

- 121 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

AZ EGSZB KAPCSOLATTARTÓ CSOPORTJÁNAK HOZZÁJÁRULÁSA

- 122 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

- 123 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

European Economic and Social Committee

Liaison Group

between the

European Economic and Social Committee

and European civil society organisations and networks

____________________

CONTRIBUTION 25

on

the renewed Lisbon Strategy 2006-2008

25 This contribution was adopted by the Liaison Group at its meeting on 19 December 2007.

- 124 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

The Liaison Group with European civil society organisations and networks was set up by the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) in September 2004. The establishment of this new body was one of a number of EESC initiatives carried out in recent years to strengthen cooperation with European civil society organisations and thus further consolidate its future position as a privileged intermediary between the European institutions and organised civil society, conveying civil society's concerns, expectations and aspirations. Its objectives also include fostering a better understanding of civil society and raising its influence at EU level. Since the Liaison Group combines its liaison role with political dialogue, it has a mission to guarantee a coordinated EESC approach to European civil society organisations and networks, as well as to monitor the progress of jointly agreed initiatives. Its main objectives are to ensure reciprocal information sharing on the various work programmes and priorities of the relevant organisations; to create opportunities for discussing common problems and to reach an opinion on issues that affect civil society as a whole. The Liaison Group also contributes to identifying subjects for prospective events or joint activities.

*

* *

- 125 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

SUMMARY

• Introduction

• Developing the social dimension: for greater cohesion

− Investing in the social sector

− Effectively factoring in the pacts

• Reinforcing the civic dimension: for responsible citizen participation

− Promoting "bottom-up" participation

− Call for effective and efficient consultation of civil society • Ensuring consistency of education and lifelong learning (LLL) policies: for a knowledge

society

− Education and lifelong learning must be made a constitutional right throughout the EU

− Implementation of actions to promote the concept of education and lifelong learning ("LLL weeks", "LLL Day")

− Establishment of a European Institute for education and lifelong learning Foreword This contribution does not claim to consider every aspect of the Lisbon Strategy. Instead, taking into account the specific membership of the Liaison Group, it aims to put forward proposals which are in line with the work undertaken by the European Economic and Social Committee and which address the cross-cutting concerns of the various sectors of activity of the civil society organisations and networks represented within the Liaison Group.

- 126 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

A. Introduction 1. Despite all the efforts undertaken to ensure that European citizens espouse the goals of the

Lisbon Strategy, it continues to be little understood (often owing to inadequate explanations), or even a total mystery to the majority of Europeans. The lack of any real political debate on this issue at national level is also to be deplored. In 2004, Wim Kok, former prime minister of the Netherlands, submitted a mid-term review of the Lisbon Strategy

to the European Commission26. This report recommended that emphasis be placed on the participation of the social partners and that efforts to communicate with citizens be stepped up so that they felt more involved. The Lisbon Strategy is still conspicuously absent from national electoral programmes and debates, contrary to the recommendations of Mr Kok's report.

2. In order to develop a real feeling among citizens that the Lisbon Strategy is their strategy,

their needs and ambitions must be placed at its heart and they must be allowed to participate in the entire process from conception to implementation to evaluation.

3. The Liaison Group thus feels that completing the knowledge-based economy and public

espousal of the Lisbon Strategy constitute the key to the success of this strategy. However, success will only be guaranteed if the Lisbon Strategy is shared and supported by all European citizens within the framework of a broad debate with citizens in each Member State encouraging the authorities to make decisions consistent with the objectives adopted and pursued at European level. In this context, the Liaison Group hopes that the proposals set out in this contribution will also be discussed at national level.

B. The social dimension must assume its full role in the Lisbon Strategy 1. Europe will only be able to develop its competitiveness and increase its growth in the long

term with a foundation of strong social protection. Economic growth and competitiveness must be backed by a strong social framework and must contribute to social progress. It must be acknowledged without reservation that good economic strategies based on a social market economy underpin the quality and cohesion of European society. Favouring economic performance and competitiveness over the other crucial elements of the European social model will result in failure.

2. In the long term, economic success is largely dependent on the cultural context, good social

protection and appropriate investment in human resources. The European Union must therefore reinforce its strategy of inclusion and encourage investment in the social sector.

26 Rising to the challenge: the Lisbon strategy for growth and employment, report by the high-level group chaired by Mr Wim Kok,

European Commission, November 2004.

- 127 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

3. It is also crucial to ensure the implementation of effective policies to protect the most vulnerable sectors of society and to promote the inclusion of disadvantaged groups into public life.

4. In this connection, the Liaison Group wishes to highlight the European Youth Pact and the

European Pact for Gender Equality, which were adopted in 2005 and 2006 respectively and have yet to be implemented fully. It is therefore vital that Member States take these pacts fully into account when implementing their national reform programmes.

The Lisbon Strategy must mobilise Europeans and its success is dependent on a social framework enabling the development and self-fulfilment of citizens through real PARTICIPATION and access to KNOWLEDGE for all, a fr amework promoting investment in social inclusion.

C. The civic dimension must be reinforced for real citizen espousal of the Lisbon Strategy 1. Like social dialogue, civil dialogue is an instrument of participatory democracy. 2. In this respect, the importance of all intermediary bodies, above and beyond the social

partners, must be acknowledged, since they act as a link between the public institutions and European citizens. Only through a "bottom-up" approach will it be possible to construct a framework of shared responsibilities.

3. The views of civil society organisations are not sufficiently taken into account in the

European Union, and at national level few Member States have set up systematic consultation of organised civil society. The Liaison Group therefore calls for effective, efficient and transparent consultation of civil society.

4. Civil society organisations must be more involved in:

• identifying good practices which are relevant to the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy, as well as designing and implementing the national reform programmes and the recommendations resulting from discussions between the Commission and individual Member States;

• preparing structured reports – produced by civil society, a reflection of institutionalised society – on the definition and monitoring of the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy at local, national and European levels.

- 128 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

5. The role of the EESC, the institutional body which represents organised civil society at European level and which therefore brings European citizens closer to European policies, must be reaffirmed and more widely acknowledged. In this context, the Committee must step up the representation of the voluntary sector, which is currently under-represented.

Real and responsible citizen participation is dependent on the acknowledgement of the importance of the EESC and of the role played by the intermediary bodies (in particular in terms of strengthening social cohesion) and on effective, efficient and transparent consultation of civil society in a context of real civil dialogue.

D. Education and lifelong learning policies, which are at the centre of the Lisbon Strategy,

need to be consistent 1. The importance of education and lifelong learning within the Lisbon Strategy is now widely

accepted. The European Council of 23 and 24 March 2000, which produced the Lisbon Strategy, emphasised the need to give "higher priority to lifelong learning as a basic

component of the European social model". This comment still applies now, when the Lisbon Strategy is being renewed.

2. Education and lifelong learning is one single process lasting from childhood to retirement27, affecting all sectors of civil society and of relevance to all European citizens. It is therefore a broad and complex concept of vast scope.

3. It must be acknowledged that: 3.1 Despite a number of declarations, the implementation within the Member States of reform in

the field of education and training is much too slow, and this reform is still insufficiently

integrated28. Despite its innovative character, the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) has rapidly shown its limitations.

3.2 Access to education and lifelong learning continues to be unequal throughout Europe29. 3.3 It is not currently possible to identify clearly the authorities responsible for education and

lifelong learning; whether at national or European level, no one wishes to claim responsibility for policies in this area.

27

See the European Commission's definition of LLL (COM(474) 2004 final, Art. 3(27)).

28 According to the European Commission's 2007 annual report on progress towards achieving the Lisbon goals in the field of education

and training, the Member States are failing to meet their objectives.

29 The Commission thus points out that the majority of NRP for growth and employment for 2006 have limitations as regards policies to

support education and lifelong learning, especially where access to training by underqualified and older people is concerned.

- 129 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

3.4 There is an inherent contradiction between this lack of consistency among EU Member States and the current policies for mobility and the "accumulation and recognition of learning outcomes".

3.5 There are no general data covering the whole field of education and lifelong learning.

4. In the light of these facts, the Liaison Group proposes that:

4.1 following the example of the right to education which is enshrined in the national constitutions and in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the right to lifelong learning should be made a constitutional right;

4.2 actions should be implemented to promote and reinforce the concept of and approach to education and lifelong learning, for example the organisation of "LLL weeks" or the launch of an "LLL Day" by the European Commission;

4.3 a European Institute for Lifelong Learning30 (EIL) should be set up. This institute would have the objective of promoting the implementation of a coordinated and responsible policy on education and lifelong learning at European level and should be organised and administered with full cooperation between all partners concerned, including the representatives of organised civil society.

The institute could also be perceived as an extension of the role of CEDEFOP31, including all approaches to access to knowledge (formal, informal and non-formal), the basic aim being to explicitly recognise the policy of education and lifelong learning. One example would be the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning (UIL). Different from the five other UNESCO education centres, this institute links educational research, policy and practice to improve access to knowledge for all.

This structure would be accompanied by national bodies32 which would include national representatives.

Only through education and lifelong learning, which are relevant to all Europeans, can citizens really espouse the Lisbon Strategy, participate in the construction of the knowledge society and thus contribute to the development and modernisation of the European social model.

* * *

30

This forum could take the form of a virtual platform allowing the exchange and pooling of good practices by all LLL stakeholders.

European citizens would be represented by their intermediary bodies. This would also be an opportunity for real recognition of civil dialogue in the field of education and training.

31 CEDEFOP's goal is to promote and develop vocational teaching and training in the European Union.

32 Bodies which could be developed along the lines of the State agency for immaterial heritage within the French MINEFI or the

competitiveness observatory set up in 2003 within the Luxemburg Ministry of Economic Affairs in connection with the Lisbon Strategy.

- 130 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

- 131 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

European civil society organisations and networks

members of the EESC Liaison Group

SECTEURS DE LA SOCIÉTÉ CIVILE

ORGANISÉE

ORGANISATIONS/RÉSEAUX PARTICIPANTS

DÉVELOPPEMENT

DEVELOPMENT

Confédération européenne des ONG d'urgence et de développement

European NGO Confederation

for Relief and Development

(CONCORD)

JEUNESSE

YOUTH

Forum européen de la Jeunesse (FEJ) European Youth Forum (EYF)

ÉGALITÉ DES GENRES

GENDER EQUALITY

Lobby européen des Femmes (LEF)

European Women's Lobby (EWL)

ÉDUCATION ET FORMATION EDUCATION AND TRAINING

Plate-forme européenne "Éducation

et Formation"

European Platform on Lifelong learning

VIE FAMILIALE

FAMILY LIFE

Confédération des organisations familiales de l'UE

Confederation of Family Organisations in the European Union

(COFACE)

- 132 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

ORGANISATIONS ET

ASSOCIATIONS PROMOUVANT L'IDÉE EUROPÉENNE

ORGANISATIONS AND ASSOCIATIONS PROMOTING THE

EUROPEAN IDEA

Mouvement européen international (MEI)

European Movement International

(EMI)

CONSOMMATION

CONSUMERS' POLICY

Bureau européen des unions

de consommateurs

The European Consumers' Organisation

(BEUC)

PRESTATAIRES DE SERVICES

SOCIAUX SERVICE PROVIDERS

Groupement des ONG

prestataires de services sociaux

Grouping of NGOs

social service providers

MOUVEMENT COOPÉRATIF COOPERATIVE MOVEMENT

COOPÉRATIVES EUROPE

COOPERATIVES EUROPE

ASSURANCE MALADIE

ET PROTECTION SOCIALE HEALTH INSURANCE

AND SOCIAL PROTECTION

Association internationale

de la Mutualité

International Association

of Mutualities

(AIM)

- 133 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

ARTS ET CULTURE ARTS AND CULTURE

Forum européen pour les Arts

et le Patrimoine (FEAP)

European Forum for Arts and Heritage (EFAH)

CITOYENNETÉ EUROPÉENNE

EUROPEAN CITIZENSHIP

Forum civique européen

European Civic Forum

PROTECTION ET INTÉGRATION

DES HANDICAPÉS PROTECTION AND INTEGRATION

OF HANDICAPPED PERSONS

Forum européen des personnes handicapées (FEPH)

European Disability Forum (EDF)

DÉVELOPPEMENT RURAL

RURAL DEVELOPMENT

Association Internationale

Ruralité-Environnement-Développement

International association

Rurality – environment – development

(RED)

ENFANCE ET DROITS DE L'ENFANT CHILDHOOD & CHILDREN'S RIGHTS

Réseau européen des enfants

The European Children's Network (EURONET)

EUROCHILD

- 134 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

PERSONNES ÂGÉES

OLDER PEOPLE

Plate-forme européenne

des personnes âgées

European Older People's Platform (AGE)

Fédération Européenne des Personnes Âgées

The European Federation of Older Persons

(EURAG)

DROITS HUMAINS

HUMAN RIGHTS

Association européenne pour la défense des Droits de l'Homme

European Association for defense of Human Rights

(AEDH)

_____________

- 135 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

KÖSZÖNETNYILVÁNÍTÁS

- 136 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

- 137 -

CESE 40/2008 .../...

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We acknowledge all participants or representatives of the national ESCs for their contribution:

Belgium Conseil Central de l'Économie Conseil National du Travail

Bulgaria Economic and Social Council

Czech Republic Council of Economic and Social Agreement

Denmark Mr Søren Kargaard, EESC member, member of the ad hoc group "Lisbon Group" (in consultation with the Danish members of the EESC)

Germany Mr Göke Frerichs, EESC member, member of the ad hoc group "Lisbon Group", (in consultation with the organisations of the German members of the EESC)

Estonia Mrs Liina Carr, EESC member (in consultation with the Estonian members of the EESC)

Ireland National Economic and Social Council

Greece Economic and Social Council

Spain Consejo Económico y Social

France Conseil économique et social (Mr Duron, rapporteur for the French ESC)

Italy Consiglio Nazionale dell'Economia e del Lavoro

Cyprus Mr Dimitris Kittenis, EESC member, member of the ad hoc group "Lisbon Group" (with the cooperation and support of the other five Cypriot members of the EESC)

Latvia Mr Viesturs KociĦš, EESC member (in consultation with the Latvian members of the EESC)

Lithuania Mr Gintaras Morkis, EESC member (in consultation with the Lithuanian members of the EESC)

Luxembourg Conseil économique et social

Hungary Economic and Social Council

Malta Malta Council for Economic and Social Development

Netherlands Sociaal-Economische Raad

Austria Beirat für Wirtschafts- und Sozialfragen

Poland Tripartite Commission for Social and Economic Affairs

Portugal Conselho Económico e Social

Romania Economic and Social Council

Slovenia Economic and Social Council

Slovakia Economic and Social Council

Finland Economic Council (in consultation with the Finnish members of the EESC)

Sweden Mr Staffan Nilsson, EESC member, member of the ad hoc group "Lisbon Group" (in consultation with the Swedish members of the EESC)

United-Kingdom Mr Bryan Cassidy, EESC member, member of the ad hoc group "Lisbon Group"

- 138 -

CESE 40/2008

as well as following representative of the Liaison Group

Liaison Group Mr Tommaso Grimaldi, rapporteur for the Liaison Group of the EESC, Secretary-General of the European Vocational Training Association (EVTA), representative of the "Education and Training" sector

megújított lisszaboni stratégia 2008–2010 · Összefoglaló jelentés az európai tanács...

Documents