International Association Ofeconomicand Social Councils

International Association ofEconomicand Social Councils

And Similar Institutions

(AICESIS)

WORKSHOP ON GOOD PRACTICES IN ESCs AND SIMILAR INSTITUTIONS

Madrid (Spain), 3-4 March2016

CES de Espana -Calle Huertas n°73 – 28014 MADRID

QUESTIONNAIRE , answers of SER, Netherlands

1 Relations between the ESC-SIand the Government/Parliament

-Does the work of the ESC-SI address the Government/Parliament/both?In the latter case, is there any type of distribution for the activities of the ESC-SI (reports, opinions, etc.) between those that address one or the other? Regarding the relation with Parliaments and apart from the issue of reports and opinions, is there any institutional formula for relations (such as parliamentary hearings for the Chairman or the Council Members during the processing of specific Bills of Law or of a regular nature)?

SER addresses both government and parliament; no difference in sort/form of ‘products’ or activities.

There are no institutional formula for relations, as asked. We do however have many interactions with parliament.

-Does ESC-SI activity with regard to the Government/Parliament take place only at the request of the latter institutions, or may it be at the initiative of the ESC-SI?

Both, at request and at own initiative

2 Relations between the ESC-SI and Ministerial Departments.

-Regarding relations with the administration and organisations, is the ESC-SI included within the organic structure of any Ministerial Department or does it have its own specific organic structure? Are there members of the ESC-SI who represent the Government or Ministerial departments?

SER has its own specific organic structure; we are not at all part of a ministry.There are nomembers in our council representing the government or ministerial departments.We do however have very close relations and interactions with almost all ministerial departments. For example: all public SER council meetings and the closed meetings of the SER’s commissions and working parties are attended by representatives of government departments as observers. These officials are appointed as observers due to their expertise in certain areas of policymaking. Their attendance improves the flow of information between government departments and our council. Next to this, there are very frequent contact with civil servants and staff members of our council on topics that relate to issues our council is working on (or will start working on in the future). The chairman and SG of our council also have frequent contacts with the top functionaries (SG’s and DG’s) of ministries.

-Does the ESC-SI have its own funds?Yes, financing of SER is through a lump sum coming out of one of the social security funds (paid for only by private sector, not by public sector).. SER can draw up it’s own budget needs (yearly), which budget – after approval of the minister of Social Affairs – is allocated and paid to our council. The approval of the minister is very light and on the total budget (we never get any questions). Next to the yearly budget, SER has its own funds (consisting of remains of budget of previous years). NB: SER is not a government body and is in this way financially independent of the government.

-Do the members of the ESC-SI or of the organisations forming it receive any type of remuneration for their activity?Yes, they receive a fee for every meeting they attend. This goes for council members, as well as for members of committees (we have many more people active in the work of our council than just the 33 members of the council). The Chairperson of the council is the only council member who receives a salary (at the level of a minister); she is full time employed as chairperson.

-Regarding the functioning of the ESC-SI, in addition to informing on draft legislation, does it also inform on government programmes or administrative action in specific areas? Do representatives of Ministerial departments participate in the drafting of reports and opinions(for example, in hearings)?

Yes, our council advises on new policies to be implemented. Not only as far as legislation is involved. We also advise on revising policies that are already in place so that they work better. Sometimes this involves looking in detail into government programmes or actions.

Representatives of departments do not directly participate in drafting the reports. However, as ‘observers’ in all our committee meeting they can and do give inputs that are taken aboard if deemed relevant by the committee members. It is also quite common practice to include (some) civil servants in hearings or expert meetings of our council; they are invited based on their expertise.

3 Relations between the ESC-SI and social agents

-Relations with processes of social consultation. Do processes of social consultation take place completely or partly within the ESC-IS? Is the ESC-SI involved in any way in collective bargaining?

Social consultation: not sure how this is meant. We don’t call it that, but probably most of the work of our council is ‘social consulation’.

Next to our council, in the Netherlands we also have ‘the Founcation of Labour’, which is bipartite (unions & employers) which is also/more formally a body of social consultation. The ‘Foundation’ consists of the same parties/groups as SER, and even for the greater part the same people/members. SER and Foundation operate really close together therefor.

SER as council is not involved in collective bargaining. That is done at sectoral levels.

-If social consultation processes take place outside the ESC-SI, does the latter have any function relating to social consultation? (For example, does it draft information and documentation to facilitate consultation, or adopt initiatives to form part of social consultation, or monitor the results of social dialogue?).See above answer. In those cases, SER has no formal role, but very often an informal/’behind the screens’ role. Staff members of SER help with drafting information/documentation; and sometimes independent experts (our third group in SER, the ‘crown members’) also help facilitate by delivering inputs. Sometimes, an agreement in a Social pact (made between Foundation and government) is followed up by the SER, e.g. to devise exact policy measures for a specific agreement. In this sense, Foundation and SER can be seen as a ‘relay race’ where the batton gets passed on.

-Relation with social agents. Apart from the fact that social agents are members of the ESC-SI, is there any procedure or formula whereby the ESC-SI relates with social agents(for example, joint meetings, participation in social agents’ activities, etc.)? Can members of organisations representing social agents participate in meetings of the ESC-SI, even if they are not members of it (for example, as specialists in certain areas, etc.)?It’s not clear to us what exactly is meant with ‘social agents’. We assume here that social agents are: unions and employers organisations. In this light our answer should be seen.

Next to the limited number of council members (33 only) many more representatives of both unions and employers organisations participate in the activities of our council. As committee members most and foremost, but also as experts in hearings, in conferences, in internet consultations etc.We also participate (sometimes) in the activities that are organised by unions of employers, e.g. in their conferences, or by talking in meetings with their membership. There are no formal procedures or formula for this. We can do as we see fit.

4 Relations between the ESC-SI and civil society(For the purpose of this questionnaire, two types of civil society organisation are considered – those that are not classed as social agents but participate in socioeconomic processes and activities, such as the social economy, consumers, etc., and those that represent social interests defined by the promotion of values such as equality, environmental protection, etc.)

-Do organisations representing civil society form part of the ESC-SI? What type of organisations are they(based on the notions given above for the purpose of this questionnaire)?Formally, no other civil society (outside unions and employers organisations) is member of our council (of 33 members). SER however has many and longstanding relations, including participation of ngo’s in relevant committees of SER (preparing the advisory reports). Such structural relations exist with consumer organisations and with environmental organisations; they always participate as members in SER-committees on issues that are directly relevant to them. Next to these consumer and environmental groups, we have many many relations and contact with ngo’s on a more ad hoc basis, where it is relevant for specific project. For example: when advising on the future of the health care system, we involve patient organisations. And when advising on social entrepreneurship, we involve social entrepreneur organisations/social economy. Etc.

Over the last 10 years, SER puts more and more effort in involving all sorts of groups in our activities. Broadening the (social) dialogue has really taken root, while keeping our basic structure of the council the same (consisting of unions, employers organisations and independent experts).

-How is this representation organised within the ESC-SI (for example, a specific group, or forming part of other representative groups…)? How is the representativeness of these organisations accredited? See answer above. Representativeness is not formally assessed; we interact with and invite the biggest/most relevant ngo’s. In practice, this hardly ever leads to any questions.

-If there is no representation of civil society in the ESC-SI, or if it does not include the two types of organisation used for the purpose of this questionnaire, are there any formulae, either institutionalised or not, for relations with these organisations?(For example, joint bodies, liaison committee, period meetings, meetings for specific purposes such as the drafting of a specific report or opinion)Organisations that offer a particular perspective on the field concerned, or that represent a specific interest, can be brought in when an advisory report is being prepared within a committee. For example, the committee can consult with such organisations by means of a hearing, a panel discussion, written consultation, interviews, or a working visit; this is in fact done on a regular basis. Certain organisations can also become ad hoc committee members (for a specific project) and assist in the preparation of the advisory report.

NB: we do not have any written out formula or laws for this. We can ‘invent’ ourselves every time again. Therefor maximum flexibility in how we operate. As long as our primary participants (unions and employers organisations) agree and feel comfortable with. Over time, they have grown used to it. And they also see the relevance of broadening the social dialogue and thereby broadening the support base for SER advice.

-When civil society organisations do not participate in the ESC-SI but do participate in other institutional bodies, is there any formula for relation or collaboration with such bodies?No, there is not any formula. [Again: the culture of wanting to work together is much more important than the precise rules of structure. It’s much more about processes that work, than about formal issues. This makes the story of SER Netherlands more difficult to understand, but it works quite good just because we can adapt quite easily!]

-Apart from the participation by civil society organisations in the ESC-SI, are any people or institutions designated to form part of the ESC-SI on the basis of their relevance (public, scientific, etc.) (for example, experts on socio-economic matters, academics, researchers...)?Do they participate on an equal footing with other Council Members, or do they have a separate status (for example, participation without voting rights)? Does the ESC-SI have any type of relation, either institutionalised or not, with universities, research centres, etc.? If so, does this relation involve participation in the drafting of reports or opinions (for example, as specialists in certain areas).As mentioned already, there are three parties in the Council: 11 representatives of the employers, 11 representatives of the employees and 11 Crown members. Crown members are independent experts (most are university professors) and they are appointed by the King at the Cabinet’s proposal (but they do not represent the government). Crown members are full members of the council, with equal voting rights/positons. [however: we hardly ever really vote, we strive for unanimous advices or reports].

Crown members/experts are not obliged to consult with the government or act in accordance with the government's instructions. Crown members include (qualitate qua) representatives of the Dutch Central Bank [Nederlandsche Bank] and the CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis [CentraalPlanbureau]. The chairperson of our council is also a Crown member. .

The role/duty of the Crown members is first to bring in relevant expertise. They are also seen as guardians of the ‘public interest’ and are also important/instrumental in helping find middle ground and compromises between employers and unions. The individuals who make up the group of Crown members are selected because they have relevant expertise and are seen as top experts in their field. The committees preparing the advisory reports are always chaired by a Crown member. The Crown members are not ‘employed’ by the Council (they get reimbursed for attending meetings).

Next to our crown members, SER has very, very many contacts/relations with university professors/groups and research institutes. We ‘tap’ them for knowledge, invite them in committee meetings, expert meetings etc .

As a background information: The SER attaches a lot of value to analysis and building a common understanding of what is the problem. For this we need a lot of input and insights. Expers and professors are usually very willing and happy to participate in our work (it is seen as highly relevant and influential).

5 Evolution of the ESC-SI

-Have there been any changes in recent years regarding the definition of the role of the ESC-SI, its competencies, composition or procedures for action? If so, describe them. Not so much change in the formal/legal definition of our council. (last relevant change was in 1995: the obligation to ask the SER for advice on every new law/act was then abolished).

The formal composition of the council is still the same as from the start in 1950 (but we now include many more groups in our work).

The law on our council (we have our own law) is quite general in the formulation of the role, competencies and procedures of the council. Our legal role is - in addition being an advisory body on socio-economic issues – to best serve the general interest as well as the interest of organised business (unions and employers combined).

Within this general formulation, we experience a lot of room to act as we see fit. SER can start new sorts of activities, e.g. function as a platform for discussions of relevant social and economic issues. Or facilitate coming to a pact (like we did on Energy issues, involving 47 subscribing parties to the Energy pact). In conclusion: there are quite some changes in the role of the council and how we operate, but for this no change in law or regulation was needed. What is however needed is (social) legitimacy that SER takes up these new roles. SER is and should be recognized by relevant groups in society to be the relevant platform or player. We’re proud to mention that SER is indeed seen as such. This is hard work!

-Have such changes been based on Government or Parliament criteria, agreements by the social agents or a combination of both (for example, relating to social consultation agreements)?No formal criteria (see above). Agreement and a ‘licence to operate’ is however very much needed. This is not formalised however.

-What was the reason for such changes? Were they related in any way to budgetary restrictions stemming from general criteria to cut public expenditure?Not at all related to budgets. Much more so related to changes in society and the need/wish to relate as best as possible this. SER has to adapt, to keep its relevance. We do so, by (much more than in the past) involving many more groups in the (social) dialogue.

-Have any strands of opinion or political criteria been observed posing the need to review the role of the ESC-SI, or even to reconsider its very existence? To what extent have these influenced any changes that have taken place in the ESC-SI?No, not in any formal way. But there is (always) some discussion in the public opinion about the role and functioning of the Council. Not everybody or every political stream likes the (strong) role of SER.

-What aspects of the activity of the ESC-SI, as defined in the original model or resulting from changes in it, may have helped maintain the role of the ESC-SI?The new ‘platform function’ of the Council, that is: bringing together relevant groups/actors to come to an common understanding or pact. And more general: the inclusion/hearing of lots of other groups/individuals in society.

6 Training for members of the ESC-SI (when answering these questions, please take into account your answers under point 4)