- 1 -

European Economic and Social Committee

Brussels, 28 August 2007

MINUTES

of the 13th meeting

of the Liaison Group with

European civil society organisations and networks,

held at the Committee building in Brussels

on 31 May 2007

______

CESE 1079/2007 FR/LB/CAT/ms

- 1 -

The thirteenth meeting of the Liaison Group with European civil society organisations and networks was held in Brussels on31 May 2007.It was chaired byJillian van Turnhout, EESC Vice-president, and Jean-Marc Roirant, co-chair of the Liaison Group.

The meeting commenced at 2.30 p.m. and finished at around 5.30 p.m.

*

* *

ATTENDANCE LIST

  • Members of the Liaison Group present

EESC representatives

Members

MsJillian VAN TURNHOUT
MrMiklos BARABAS
MrCarmelo CEDRONE
MrFilip HAMRO-DROTZ
MrRaymond HENCKS
MrBernardo HERNÁNDEZ BATALLER
MsBrenda KING
MsAn LE NOUAIL MARLIERE
MrStaffan NILSSON
MrJan OLSSON
MsIrini Ivoni PARI
MrMario SEPI
MrSukhdev SHARMA
MrCveto STANTIC
MrJános TÓTH / EESC Vice-president
Group III Vice-president
Group II member
President of the REX section
Group II member
President of the INT section
President of the SOC section
Group II member
Group III President
Vice-presidentof the ECO section
Group I Vice-president
Group II President
Vice-president of the REX section
Group I member
President of the TEN section

Representatives of European civil society organisations and networks

Members

MrJean-Marc ROIRANT / Secretary-General, Ligue française de l'enseignement, President of the European Civil Society Platformfor Education and Training (EUCIS-LLL)
MsCécile GRÉBOVAL
MrTommaso GRIMALDI
MrHenrik KRÖNER
MrLuk ZELDERLOO
Alternates
MrPatrice COLLIGNON
MsSabine FRANK
MrGérard LESEUL
MsAriane RODERT
MrYves ROLAND-GOSSELIN
MrDaniel SPOEL / Acting Secretary-General, European Women's Lobby (EWL)
Secretary-General, European Vocational Training Association (EVTA)
Secretary-General, International European Movement (IEM)
Secretary-General, European Association of Service Providers for Persons with Disabilities (EASPD)
Director, Rurality-Environment-Development International Association (RED)
(for MrGérard PELTRE)
Deputy Secretary-General,European Forum for the Arts and Heritage (EFAH) (for Ms Ilona KISH)
Deputy General Delegate, Coordinating Committee of European Cooperative Associations (CCACE)
(for Mr PFLIMLIN)
European Council for Non-Profit Organisations (CEDAG)
President, Confederation of Family Organisations in the EU (COFACE) (for Mr William LAY)
Administrator, Permanent Forum of European Civil Society
(for MrJan-Robert SUESSER)
  • Members of the Liaison Group absent

EESC representatives

MrGeorgios DASSIS
MrHenri MALOSSE
MsMaría SÁNCHEZ MIGUEL
(apologies received)
MsMarie ZVOLSKA(apologies received) / President of theECO section
Group I President
President of the NAT section
Group I member

Representatives of European civil society organisations and networks

Members

MrOlivier CONSOLO (apologies received) / Director, European NGO Confederation for Relief and Development (CONCORD)
MrMaurice DURANTON
MsIlona KISH
(apologies received)
MrWilliam LAY
(apologies received)
MrJim MURRAY
MrGérard PELTRE(apologies received)
MrÉtienne PFIMLIN (apologies received)
MrDiogo PINTO
(apologies received)
MrJan-Robert SUESSER
(apologies received)
MrYannis VARDAKASTANIS
Alternates
MsCarlotta BESOZZI(apologies received)
MrMarcel SMEETS / President, International Association of Mutual Benefit Societies (AIM)
Secretary-General, European Forum for the Arts and Heritage (EFAH)
Director, Confederation of Family Organisations in the EU (COFACE)
Director, European Consumers' Organisation (BEUC)
President, Rurality-Environment-Development International Association (RED)
Co-president, Cooperatives Europe
Secretary-General, European Youth Forum (EYF)
Member of the Board of Directors, European Civic Forum
President, European Disability Forum (FEPH/EDF)
Director, European Disability Forum (EDF) (alternate for MrYannis VARDAKASTANIS)
Director-General, International Association of Mutual Benefit Societies (AIM) (alternate for Mr Maurice DURANTON)
  • Observers

MrPierre BARGE
MsEmilie WHITE
MsAnja HÄRTWIG / President, European Association for Human Rights (EAHR)
EURONET
EUROCHILD
  • Other EESC representatives

MrGöke FRERICHS
MrJoost VAN IERSEL
MrThomas JANSEN / EESC member, rapporteur of the ad hoc group on Constitutional Questions
EESC member, rapporteur of the ad hoc group on the Renewed Lisbon Strategy2006 – 2008
MrFrerichs's expert
  • Other representatives ofEuropean civil society organisations and networks

MsMélanie BARTHEZEME
MsJeanne PEREGO
MsAudrey FRITH / European Association for Human Rights (EAHR)
European Vocational Training Association (EVTA)
Coordinator, European Civil Society Platform for Education and Training (EUCIS-LLL)
  • EESC Secretariat
MrPatrick FÈVE
MrGilbert MARCHLEWITZ
MrJuri SOOSAAR / Head of the Unit for Relations with Civil Society Organisations and Constitutional Issues
Administrator, Secretariat of the ECO section
Administrator, Secretariat of the ECO section

*

* *

1.Adoption of the draft agenda

Msvan Turnhoutapologised on behalf of the EESC President, Mr Dimitriadis, who was unable to co-chair the meeting due to alast-minute, unforeseen change in circumstances.

The agenda was adopted.

2.Approval of the minutes of the 12th meeting, held on 1 March 2007

The minutes were approved.

3.Statements by the EESC Vice-president, Jillian van Turnhout, and the co-chair of the Liaison Group, Jean-Marc Roirant

Msvan Turnhoutreminded members of the EESC Bureau's decision to increase the number of EESC representatives in the Liaison Group by 9 members. She therefore welcomed those who were attending the meeting for the first time.

For the specific benefit of the new members, Msvan Turnhout reiterated the importance that the Committee attached to the Liaison Group, and stated that the challenge was to establish synergies with European civil society organisations and networks and work together in a practical way in order to make the voice of organised civil society heard, thus encouraging the establishment of a genuine civil dialogue with the European institutions in order to serve the general interest.

MrRoirantwelcomed the increased EESC representation in the Liaison Group which should help to give it a new impetus.He underlined that all the elements had now been brought together so that the Liaison Group could focus in a practical way on the issues that directly affected European citizens and would determine their future, by taking full advantage of the experience and expertise of its members.

He stated that several significant issues had been resolved in this respect; firstly, the Liaison Group's operating rules would be definitively adopted at this meeting. These new rules,which had been adapted and supplemented in the light of the development plan (adopted by the Committee Bureau in February), constituted the end of not only the evaluation process of the Liaison Group, which had been carried out throughout the second half of 2006, but also the work carried out by representatives of European civil society organisations and networks relating, in particular, to the issue of representativeness criteria. Thus, the door was now open for the controlled enlargement of the Liaison Group to new sectors of civil society.

The adoption of these new rules was coupled with the strong ambition of representatives of European civil society organisations and networks to bring real added value to the Committee's work and to help encourage the widest possible ownership, by members of the organisations and networks in the Member States, of the social issues which were discussed by the Committee.In order to do this, they should communicate the results of the Liaison Group's discussions and work as widely as possible.

Secondly, there was now a clearer idea of the synergies to be established between the Liaison Group, and in particular the European civil society organisations and networks who were members of the Group, and the Committee's Groups and sections.The aim here was to improve coherence with the EESC's work and therefore to increase the added value of these organisations' and networks' contributions to it. In this context, Mr Roirant was pleased that the section presidents had all agreed, at the previous meeting on 1 March, to involve, in an appropriate form, representatives of European civil society organisations and networks in the areas of their sections' work that were directly relevant to them. Furthermore, the organisations and networks would now be regularly informed of new and ongoing EESC work, which would enable them to contact the Committee's sections and rapporteurs onspecific matters when appropriate.

The Committee's rapporteurs would also be invited, when drawing up opinions on issues of common interest, to exchange views with members of the Liaison Group.

Thirdly, MrRoirantstated that the Liaison Group's work programme focused on issues which were at the heart of the concerns of civil society players (both EESC members and external players).Three significant work areas had beenselected for the period 2007-2008: the renewed Lisbon Strategy, the Treaty reform process and intercultural dialogue.

For each of these areas, the representatives of European civil society organisations and networks had appointed a coordinator whose role would be tocollect all the contributions,submit a summary of them to Liaison Group members and to liaise between the Liaison Group and the relevant structures andplayers in the Committee. Tommaso Grimaldi, representing the "Education and training" sector, had been appointed as coordinator for the Lisbon Strategy. He would therefore liaise with the Committee's Lisbon Group, the president of which was Mr Mario Sepi.

Jan-Robert Suesser, representing the "European Citizenship" sector, had been appointed as coordinator for the Treaty reform process and would act as a link between the Liaison Group's work and the Committee's work.It had also already been agreed with the Committee's ad hoc group on Constitutional Questionsthat the Liaison Group would be closely involved in the initiatives that the EESC could already take during the second half of 2007 in order to make the voice of civil society heard during the Intergovernmental Conference.

As regards intercultural dialogue, the objective was to hold a major event in 2008, the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue, in order to raise the Liaison Group's profile.

MrRoirantstated that two other issues would also be considered by representatives of European civil society organisations and networks at the same time as the three work areas.The first related to the implementation of the EU Financial Regulation and would build on the work already carried out by the Liaison Group on this subject. The second, which Mr Roirant himself would coordinate, related to civil dialogue. It would involve re-starting work on the issue of a statute for a European association and the European mutual society, particularly during the French EU Presidency which waspromoting such statutes.Further consideration would also be given to the issue of charters of reciprocal commitments between public authorities and the voluntary sector.

Finally, MrRoirantspoke about the Committee's 50th anniversary, which would be commemorated in 2008, and which would provide an opportunity to promote the activities of the EESC and the Liaison Group.

MsvanTurnhoutthanked Mr Roirant and commented that the Committee members in the Liaison Group would certainly be interested in being involved in discussions on the Financial Regulation and civil dialogue.Consideration would need to be given to thepractical arrangements for such involvement in due course.

4.The renewed Lisbon Strategy 2006-2008

MsvanTurnhoutasked Joost van Iersel and Miklós Barabás, rapporteur and co-rapporteur (respectively)of the EESC's Lisbon Group, to sum up the Committee's work in this area.

Mr van Ierselfirst reminded members of the Resolution onThe implementation of the renewed Lisbon Strategy adopted by the Committee on 15 February 2007.This would be followed by the adoption, at the plenary session in July, of four own-initiative opinions which were being finalised by the relevant sections, on the areas for priority action laid down by the European CouncilinMarch 2006: Investment in knowledge and innovation, Business potential, especially of SMEs, Employment of priority categoriesand The definition of an energy policy for Europe.He emphasised the close cooperation maintained with national Economic and Social Councils both in drawing up these opinions and in the Lisbon Group's work. Case studies, at national level, would thus be appended to the Committee opinions.

In September a new stage of the Committee's work would begin with the preparation by the Lisbon Group of the Committee's contribution to the summary report, to be presented to the Spring 2008 European Council, on the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy at national level. This report would incorporate the national Economic and Social Councils' contributions and also, as planned, the Liaison Group's contribution.

Mr van Ierselthen spoke about the more general context surrounding the renewed Lisbon Strategy,highlighting a change in attitude that occurred during 2005, by both Member States and the Commission, on how to pursue its implementation. This change in attitude was the result of the realisation that the Lisbon Strategy would not achieve its objectives without genuine political ownership by Member States of the commitments made jointly in the Council. This ownership would determine the success of the implementation of the national reform programmeswhich were to be assessed by the Commission at regular intervals.

Furthermore, a realisation had dawned regarding the need for citizens themselves to be involved in the implementation of the strategy, which assumed the establishment of effective partnerships with all the relevant civil society players. This was why the Committee had been requested by the European Council to make the voice of organised civil society heard and to ensure that it was more actively involved at national level. For this reason, the EESC was cooperating closely with the network of national ESCs and also wished the Liaison Group to be actively involved in the Committee's work, within the overall process.

Mr van Ierselthus felt that the Lisbon Strategy, considered at one time to be on its last legs, had been revived thanks to a transfer of responsibilities from European to national level, brought about by the national reform plans and a fresh and firmer commitment to taking into consideration the roleplayed by the social partners and other civil society players.The upshot should be a form of governance involving several levels of responsibilities and competences.

In conclusion, he stated that the Committee's contribution to the summary report, to be drawn up by the Lisbon Group, would not aim to issue proposals on what the Member States or the Commission should do in order to help the Lisbon Strategy achieve its objectives, but would specify what organised civil society could do to promote these objectives.The Liaison Group's contribution should also follow these lines.

MrBarabáscommented that if the practical aim of the exercisewas to promote ownership of the Lisbon Strategy by civil society, one nevertheless had to ask whether civil society organisations at national level were fully informed about the strategy and the national reform programmes, and whether these organisations felttruly committed to working in a practical way towards achieving the objectives.

He stressed that Committee membersand representatives of European civil society organisations and networks,as well as national ESCs, all had a responsibility to encourage civil society organisations at national level to play a practical part in the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy and, in order to do this, to forge partnerships.

MrRoirantthen asked Tommaso Grimaldito present a memo that he had drawn up as a basis for discussion.The memoset out the general position of Liaison Group members from European civil society organisations and networks on the Lisbon Strategy, and offered pointers for the Liaison Group's discussions and work.

MrGrimaldi stated that the discussionshad first focused on the methodology to be followed in order to ensure that the Liaison Group's contribution brought added value to the work in progress. The conclusion was that the "reading" that had to be done of the Lisbon Strategyand the questions that this would raise should be approached from the specific point of view of the citizen, working on the principle that the citizen should be at the centre of the process.

If members agreed, it should be possible to structure the work around five main areas: (i) the place given to active citizenshipand democratisation;(ii) the significance to be attached to the information society, following three areas set out in the memo; (iii) the need toredevelop the social contract; (iv)the notion of lifelong learning;and (v) the placeto be given to the services of general interest in building aEurope where the notion of citizenship was central.

Representatives of European civil society organisations and networks felt that a work framework was needed which viewed the Lisbon Strategy in the context of European integration. In this respect,there should be afollow-upto the November 2004mid-term review of the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy which had been drawn up by the high-level groupchaired by Wim Kok.The review of the last two years should focus on three levels, which were also set out in the memo: (i) themain progress made and the assessmentthat could be drawn from it;(ii) the internal consistency of the Lisbon Strategy; and (iii) the relevance of the strategy being followed. The fundamental, more general issue of democratic control was also raised.

Finally, Mr Grimaldi informed members that he had received an initial contribution from the sector of social service providers which was appended to the memo.He that stressed the memo's main objective was to identify the potential main lines of discussion, from which it would be possible to make some recommendations and proposals which could be supported both by the "families" of associations represented in the Liaison Group and by the Group's EESC members.

In response to a question from MrRoirant,Mr van Ierselconfirmed that the Liaison Group's contribution should be finalised for the end of December.

MrRoirantthen opened the general discussion.

Carmelo Cedrone,anEESC Group II member, felt that the Lisbon Strategy had two main faults. Firstly, it lacked flexibility and was based on a too centralised approach and secondly, the instruments for its implementation were unsuitable, not to mention the fact that the strategy had not resulted in a real change in policies by Member States. He felt that serious consideration should be given to these problems.