First Meeting of the DG Troika

Draft Minutes

First Meeting of the DG Troika

24 March 2006, Federal Chancellery, Hohenstaufengasse 3, 1010 Vienna

Opening Remarks

Mrs Karin Thienel (Presidency) opens the meeting on behalf of Mr Emmerich Bachmayer who will be joining later because of an unexpected meeting he has to attend. She suggests starting the meeting with the overview of the current EPAN activities.

Overview on current EPAN Activities

Thus, Mrs Karin Thienel (Chair HRWG) gives a presentation on the current EPAN activities. Firstly, she talks about the study on “Decentralisation and Accountability” as part of the mid-term programme on Public Administration Modernisation. The study is carried out by Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration and EIPA in cooperation with IPSG. She points out that up to date 28 replies have been already received so that consequently a response rate of 100% is possible. Additionally, she gives details on the preliminary results of the study so far.Furthermore, she provides information on the study on “Cross border mobility of Public Sector Workers”. She says that the study is based on the intensive examination of mobility by the HRWG in close cooperation with the European Commission. Its aim is to update and complete the already existing information gathered during several Presidencies and finalized during the Danish Presidency in 2002. She explains that the intended result is a summarizing analysis of the information gathered and that mobility-experts and persons especially interested in the topic will be the target groups of the study. She also gives information on the preliminary results up to date. Thirdly, she talks about the National Contact Points and the DG’s decision during the Dutch and Luxembourg Presidencies to provide structured and standardised information on Mobility for the EU citizens. This information will be published on the website Up until now information on 16 Member States is available and the remaining 9 Member States are invited to deliver information until 14 April 2006. As regards the Information on the Structure of the Civil and Public Services of the EU-Member States she points out that the document elaborated during the Irish Presidency and the Luxembourg Presidency should be updated during the Austrian Presidency and that up to now 12 replies have been received. A further aim is to elaborate a short management summary on the basis of the updated document.

- 1 -

Mr Juhani Turunen (Finland) thanks Mrs Karin Thienel for her presentation and says that in his opinion the current EPAN activities are a very valuable approach to bridge between the presidencies. He points out that Finland will continue this work in its presidency. What he is missing is a discussion on the current changes in the labour force itself. He gives the example of Finland where 25% of the labour force and 80% of public service leaders will leave the civil service within the next five years. He emphasizes that this is a problem we have to deal with and therefore wants to start a discussion on that. As regards the Mobility issue he says that this is a long and winding road to go. Therefore we should concentrate on the state level due to the fact that for example in Finland public service is very much decentralized. In general he thinks that the exchange of information on this topic is very important and valuable.

Mrs Karin Thienel (Chair HRWG) points out that the study on decentralisation isalso referring to socio-demographic changes as drivers for public sector modernisation as well, though the question is not such a big issue in Austria. But this may of course differ between the Member States. The question on Mobility is a very technical topic and the outcome of the study may be of great interest for those who work in this field. What she finds interesting for example is to see that France has changed its system. Furthermore, the information gathered on mobility could be a good base for a discussion especially with the Trade Union Delegation at the DG meeting in May 2006.

Mr John Barker (UK) states that decentralisation is a rich and moving area. The UK for example is centralizing and decentralizing at the same time. As regards the question on mobility he says that since 1997 discussions in this field and especially on the topic of recognition of diplomas has not led to any compromise or further development. The decision making whether a diploma is recognized or not should therefore be centralized on a European level. He feels very sorry, but he hardly sees the added value of the work. It will surely be very helpful to have the information but he doubts that it will lead to any further substantial developments. He would consider it useful to contract an external consultant on a European level to analyse the situation and bring up concrete steps which can be taken to improve it.

Mrs Karin Thienel (Chair HRWG) replies that the questionnaire on mobility is carried out because it fits very well in the mid-term programme and the European Year of Workers Mobility 2006 and that the outcome will be very interesting especially for experts.

Mr Paul Roberts (UK) fully agrees but mentions that the situation in the United Kingdom is quite different to the rest of Europe: for example, London Metropolitan Police needs to have a diverse workforce and therefore especially tries to attract non-UK nationals.

Mr John Barker (UK) adds that at the moment at least 75% of the jobs in the UK civil service are open to non-UK nationals.

Mr Juhani Turunen (Finland) mentions that in Finland the sector of frontier guards is still under the nationality condition, but that the cooperation at the European level in this sector is very close. His idea is to invite the director of FRONTEX, the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union, who is a Finnish national, to the meeting with the Trade Union Delegation during the Finnish Presidency. Probably the UK could nominate someone, too. He is of the opinion that concrete steps should be taken and that only discussion is not enough.

Mrs Karin Thienel (Presidency)thanks Mr Barker (UK), Mr Roberts (UK) and Mr Turunen (Finland) for their contributions and proceeds with the agenda. She then gives the floor to Mr Michael Kallinger (Chair IPSG) who gives a presentation on the current work of the IPSG working group.

Mr Michael Kallinger (Chair IPSG) gives an overview of the activities under way in the IPSG-working group during the Austrian presidency. One important focus of the work is CAF, the European Common Assessment Framework. A revised version of this instrument, called "CAF 2006", is being compiled right now, strengthening elements like ethics, participation, innovation and accountability. Another product will be a publication called “CAF works – Better results for the citizens by using CAF”, presenting 30 best-practice CAF-applications from 17 countries. As far as the topic of Customer Satisfaction is concerned, during the UK-Presidency a first screening of the situation in the MS has been effectuated. During the Austrian Presidency, these different approaches will be analysed and a report on the status quo will be drafted.

Mrs Katju Holkeri (Finland) expresses her happiness with the IPSG work during the Austrian Presidency. She says that the CAF will be promoted also at the 4th Quality Conference (including the revised version and the publication), together with EIPA and that the CAF work will be continued during the Finnish presidency. She then talks shortly about the 4th Quality Conference in Tampere and says that the exact programme for the meeting will be drafted before Easter.

Mrs Karin Thienel (Presidency) thanks Mrs Katju Holkeri (Finland) and introduces MrGerald Trost (Chair eGov WG) who gives information on the current work of the eGov-working group.

He states that, following the working plan for the EPAN eGovernment working group that cites the streamlining of business processes as an activity in alignment with the i2010 aims,Austria has commissioned an exploratory study in the management approach of Business Process Management. The study is carried out by the University of Linz and involves interviews with e-government project managers as well as case studies. Results and recommendations will be presented at the e-government working group meeting in Vienna.

Mr John Barker (UK) points out that he is very delighted with the work undertaken by the Austrian Presidency concerning this topic, especially since since a major restructuring fund has been put in place in the UK which will also cover investments in ICT.. The work also is a valuable contribution to the work the European Commission is doing in this field.

Mr Gerald Trost (Presidency) points out that the work aims to prepare the ground for new indicators. Up to now Cap Gemini benchmarking indicators are being used but no indicators that show the outcome. The European Commission decided to draw up new indicators. The eGov-working group therefore is working on such indicators. He points out that nobody knows what e-government contributes to the Lisbon-process. This could be important during the Finnish Presidency. The Cap Gemini indicators will be used until 2009.

Mr Juhani Turunen (Finland) fully agrees with Mr John Barker (UK) that it is extremely important to modernize the indicators. He says that we have to concentrate on what we get from e-government. He hopes to be able to continue the good work of the Austrian Presidency on this issue under the Finnish Presidency.

Mr Emmerich Bachmayer (Chair) joins the meeting.

Mrs Ursula Eder (Presidency)then gives a presentation on the meeting of Directors of Schools and Institutes of Public Administration which will be hold on 6/7 April 2006 in Vienna.She outlines that the meeting takes place twice a year and that it is an informal network of the heads of the European educational institutions for the public service. The emphasis of these meetings is mainly an exchange of views on topics of common interest. During the Austrian Presidency the principal theme of the conference will be e-Learning. There will be a more scientific approach to the topic presented by the keynote speaker - Prof. Peter Baumgartner of Fernuniversität Hagen - on the first day. The second day is reserved for a more tangible debate on the practical aspects of the implementation of e-Learning tools. The Federal Chancellery will inform about the currently elaborated e-Learning program for the Austrian Civil Service to develop English language and communication skills in an EU context. Delegates from Finland, France and United Kingdom will present examples of e-Learning programmes from their institutions. The goals envisaged with this meeting is to learn from each other and maybe also starting new co-operations in this field of activity among EU member states.

Mr John Barker (UK) is delighted that as far as the content is concerned the Austrian Presidency does it in that way. He says that the conference’s goals are very good.

Mr Emmerich Bachmayer (Chair) thanks Mrs Ursula Eder (Presidency) for her comprehensive presentation and gives the floor to Mr Stefan Ritter (Presidency) who provides information on the topic of Better Regulation.

Mr Stefan Ritter (Presidency) points out that currently a guidance for chairs of Council Working Groupson the handling of the European Commission’s Impact Assessment is elaborated in the Council Working Group “Competitiveness and Growth”. It is designed to help Council Working Group chairs to work effectively with the Commission and MemberStates before and during Working Groups. Furthermore it aims to ensure consistency in dealing with impact assessments across Council formations. Furthermore, he mentions that a Presidency Non-Paper on the question on how quantitative aims should be set by the European Commissionwas discussed in and welcomed by the European Policy Committee. He then gives a short overview on the content of the conference “Europe begins at home” at which high-level participants will discuss the roles of national administration in the application of the principle of Subsidiarity and the role of Better Regulation.

Mr John Barker (UK)is delighted that the Austrian Presidency continues the work of the UK Presidency.

Mr Emmerich Bachmayer (Chair) thanks Mr Stefan Ritter (Presidency) for his very informative presentation.

COFFEE BREAK

Recent Developments in Social Dialogue / Paper on “Next Steps in Social Dialogue” and response of the Trade Union Delegation

Mr Emmerich Bachmayer (Chair) gives the floor to Mrs Karin Thienel (Presidency).

Mrs Karin Thienel (Presidency) gives a presentation on the recent developments in the area of social dialogue and the Austrian Presidency’s paper “Next Steps in Social Dialogue”. She resumes the substantial progress in social dialogue achieved under the Luxembourg and the UK Presidencies. She refers on how the paper “Next Steps in Social Dialogue” was developed and reports about the main points of this document and including the Austrian proposal for future areas and forms of cooperation. She then talks about the areas of cooperation during the Austrian Presidency and presents the agenda of the meeting with the Trade Union Delegation in May. She states that these proposals are made in the full awareness that EPAN is an informal network of representatives of national administrations with differing competences, legislative backgrounds and differing principles of public service, but the proposals aim at a better integration in the normal working procedures of the informal EPAN and efficient cooperation which does not result in a growth of new structures and duplication of work. She then mentions that the Trade Union Delegation pointed out that since the positive achievements under the Luxembourg and UK Presidencies we are now at a consolidating phase of building trust and confidence between both sides. Substantive policy discussions on themes, jointly selected by both sides, will contribute, they hope, to the gradual process of establishing a European sectoral social dialogue committee in national administrations

Mr Emmerich Bachmayer (Chair) thanks Mrs Karin Thienel (Presidency) for her comprehensive presentation. He adds that these tasks have to be fulfilled in view of the minister’s meeting to be held during the German Presidency.

Mr Juhani Turunen (Finland) states that it is very good to have some fresh air on this topic and that he really appreciates the work done during the Austrian Presidency. He explains that the Finnish Presidency will use the Lisbon-Strategy as an “umbrella” and therefore look at the role of Social Dialogue in cooperative governance. He points out that the expectations of the Trade Union delegation are high and that we will have a discussion on the challenges Social Dialogue can have in terms of the Lisbon strategies. The Finnish Presidency will continue with further steps on mobility. He says that we have to find out how to make progress in this topic. Consequently, the Finnish Presidency will continue the Austrian Presidency’s work and especially schedule the meeting with the Trade Union Delegation at the first day of the 47th DG meeting as well.

Mr John Barker (UK)congratulates the Austrian Presidency for the work done so far on Social Dialogue. He asks whether the Trade Union delegation attended the whole Troika Secretariat meeting and will attend the whole 2nd meeting of the HRWG. He makes clear that he has no problems with them attending meetings as long as there is time for discussion among ourselves. As regards the studies he raises the question whether it is of our interest to forward them to the Trade Union delegation too. He asks if we really want them to know what we think since the two sides are very different. But as a matter of fact this should not mean that they should be excluded totally. As regards the programme for the DG-meeting in May it is fine for him.

Mr Emmerich Bachmayer (Chair) highlights that the topic of mobilty is the central focus in the seminar with the Trade Union delegation. As regards the involvement of the Trade Union delegation he explains that it is clear that they have different point of views as employers have. Both sides, employers and employee representations have different views acting as national representatives or in their European capacity.

Mr John Barker (UK) points out that the situation with Trade Unions in the UK really similar, but he appreciates that the Austrian Presidency has chosen this topic for substantive discussion.

Mr Gerard Druesne (EIPA) explains that the Free Movement of Workers and Mobility are two different topics. He asks whether Finland has already an idea of topics they intend to discuss with the Trade Union delegation.

Mr Juhani Turunen (Finland) replies that the two major topics to discuss with the Trade Union delegation during the Finnish Presidency will be the Lisbon Strategy and cooperative governance and mobility.

Mr Emmerich Bachmayer (Chair) makes it clear that there is no way to discuss the Austrian or German restrictions on Free Movement of Workers with the new Member States. EPAN cannot discuss these problems with the Trade Union Delegation. If they want to do so they will have to go on a higher level e.g. the Council level. He emphasizes that this should be made very clear to the Trade Union delegation. Regarding the problem of forwardingresults of studies and surveys to them he states that the conclusions could be given to them but that in the long term there has to be a certain publication policy in general. By no means can confidential information be forwarded to them.