Committee of Senior Representatives (CSR)

Twenty Second Meeting

Reykjavik, Iceland

16-17 October 2013

Title / Minutes from the 22nd Meeting of the NDPHS Committee of Senior Representatives
Submitted by / Secretariat
Summary / Note / This document outlines the main discussion points and decisions made during the 22nd meeting of the CSR
List of Annexes / Annex 1 - Proposed NDPHS Work Plan for 2014
Annex 2 - Terms of Reference and Timelinefor the NDPHS ad hoc Working Group for the Development of a NDPHS Strategy 2014-2020
Annex 3 – List of documents submitted to the meeting
Annex 4 – List of participants

1. Opening of the meeting and welcome

The meeting was opened and chaired by Ms. Liisa Ollila, the NDPHS CSR Chair.

The Host, Ms. Anna LiljaGunnarsdóttir, the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Welfare ofIceland, welcomed the participants, introduced the Ministry, its structure, organization and main tasks, and wished the participants a successful meeting.

2. Adoption of the agenda

Latvia proposed to move item “7. Statement by the UNECE Protocol on Water and Health” after agenda item “4. Information by the NDPHS Partners and Participant” and combine agenda items “5.1 Monitoring and reporting the NDPHS progress. Draft report on the implementation of the current NDPHS Strategy” and “5.2 Draft NDPHS Work Plan for 2014. Prolongation of the mandates of the Expert and Task Groups”.

Russia requested to change the title of agenda item 5 as follows: “Implementation of the NDPHS Strategy and coordination of the Health Priority Area in the EUSBSR Action Plan”.

The Meeting adopted the revised Provisional agenda with timetable (submitted as document CSR 22/2/1/Rev 1) with the changes proposed by Latvia and Russia.

3. Information by the NDPHS Chairmanship and the NDPHS Secretariat

The Chair commended the completion of the process of establishment of the NDPHS Secretariat with its own legal capacity and thanked the Host Country Sweden for its support. Further, she informed about the Finnish Presidency of the Council of the Baltic Sea States in 2013-2014 and noted that Finland was closely following the ongoing discussions on the EU financial framework 2014-2020.

The Director of the Secretariat informed about the successful completion of the process of establishing the NDPHS Secretariat with its own legal capacity and thanked the Parties, and especially the Host Country, for their support throughout the entire process. He further informed about the decisions of the Parties regarding the employment of an Administrative Officer/Accountant, as well as the prolongation of the contract of Ms. Shawnna Robert until the end of 2014, which would be done with the project money and would strengthen the Secretariat’s capacity to help, within the means and time available, the Expert and Task Groups with their project activities.

The Meeting took note of the provided information.

4. Information by the NDPHS Partners and Participant

Germanyinformed that on 10 July 2013 the German Cabinet adopted the strategy paper “Shaping global health – taking joint action – embracing responsibility”[1], which is the first German global health strategy paper. Further, it thanked Estonia for its willingness to assume the co-Chairmanship of the NDPHS after the Finnish Chairmanship comes to an end.

Norway informed about its new government and that the new government’s platform mentioned the area in the High North as an important area for Norway. It is expected that the work with the NDPHS shall continue.

The BEAC Working Group on Health and Related Social Issuesinformed that on 6 November 2013 the chairmanship would be handed over by Norway and Karelia Region to Sweden and Murmansk Region. Further, it informed that health was mentioned among the priorities in the Kirkenes Declaration adopted in June 2013 by Prime Ministers.

Estonia noted that it was looking forward to working together with the incoming Chair Country Germany, and informed about the high-level WHO conference held in Tallinn on 17 -18 October 2013, which was a follow up conference to the Tallinn Charter adopted in 2008.

The Meeting took note of the provided information.

5. Statement by the UNECE Protocol on Water and Health

With reference to document CSR 22/7/1, Mr. Kjetil Tveitan, the Chair of the Bureau of the UNECE/WHO Protocol on Water and Healthintroduced the Protocol, its draft work programme for 2014-2016 and presented ideas regarding the areas proposed to be explored for potential collaboration between the NDPHS and the Protocol. He informed about the Norway’s chairmanship of the Bureau from 2010 until 2013 and that on 25-27 November 2013, during the Meeting of the Parties to the Protocol, a new chair country would be elected. He also noted that out of ten NDPHS Partner Countries seven were Parties to the Protocol. Further, he informed about the achievements of the Protocol and stressed that an essential element of the Protocol was that every Party itself decides on a set of national targets for improvement, tailored to the specific needs and situation of every country. He also noted that mutual assistance among the Parties was among the key elements of the Protocol.

Further, Ambassador Carola Bjørklundinformed about the technical and financial support to cooperation in line with the Protocol, e.g., the Project Facilitation Mechanism (PFM). She further stressed that a major success of the PFM was the creation of the Water Fund in 2010 at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, under the initiative and leadership of Norway.

The Meeting took note of the presented information and agreed to take it into account when discussing the development of the NDPHS Strategy 2014-2020.

6. Implementation of the NDPHS Strategy and coordination of the Health Priority Area in the EUSBSR Action Plan

6.1 Monitoring and reporting on the NDPHS progress. Draft report on the implementation of the current NDPHS Strategy

and

6.2 Draft NDPHS Work Plan for 2014. Prolongation of the mandates of the Expert and Task Groups

Latvia thanked the Expert Groups and the AMR TG and the OSH TG for preparing the final reports and noted that overall the reports, combined with the feedback received from the Latvian experts, provided a good overview of the results and an understanding on how to move ahead. At the same time, it noted that the final report could not be regarded as completed, as it contained different formats, internal question marks etc. Further, it noted that the groups had chosen different approach to filling out the tables, e.g., some groups had provided concise information regarding the main achievements, whereas others had chosen to report on almost every activity, which makes it difficult to understand what has been achieved. It also asked to consider that all groups report on the Objective 1 but that it is compiled together and not repeated under each Goal. Latvia invited to consider using the next EG Chairs and ITAs meeting to discuss how the agreed common approach in filling out the template should be ensured.

With reference to document CSR 22/5.1/1, the Secretariatrequested the Meeting to provide guidance on further steps towards the adoption of the final report and whether it should be presented to the ministerial PAC 10. In particular, it noted that some of the groups’ reports were not finalized and that information compiled by the Secretariat regarding the Goal 1 (the role and working methods of the NDPHS are strengthened) could not be regarded as finalized because Goal 1 is a common effort of all Partnership structures and further input was needed from the groups regarding their achievements towards implementing Goal 1.

Germanyexpressed a view that the report was too long for submission to the ministers and proposed to discuss it thoroughly at the next CSR meeting.

Poland requested to finish the editing of the report. Further, with reference to document CSR 22/5.5/Info 1,presenting recently completed health and social well-being projects in the ND area, it requested to add the contact details of the leaders of the projects.

With reference to the Report on the implementation of the NDPHS Strategy in 2010–2013 (submitted as document CSR 22/5.1/1) and the NDPHS Work Plan for 2014 (submitted as document CSR 22/5.2/1), the PPHS EG, the ASA EG, the NCD EG and the HIV/AIDS&AI EG presented their main achievements during 2010-2013 and their plans for 2014. All groups stressed that in 2014 the main focus of their work would be on the development of the NDPHS Strategy beyond 2013 and the operational plans.

Germany reiterated its proposal to deal with the final report at the next CSR meeting and invited the groups to finalize the reports and include the comments expressed during the current meeting, as well as to insert information covering the entire period until the end of 2013. Regarding the work plans it stated that the most important focus should be on the development of the NDPHS Strategy beyond 2013 and suggested that the planned groups’ autumn meetings in 2014 could take place in June instead of autumn, in order to be able to contribute to the development of the strategy according to the proposed timeline.

Russia suggested that the final reports of the groups should be available well in advance to allow for sufficient time to provide feedback already before the CSR meeting. Further, it requested additional information regarding the “Strengthening prevention and reduction of impacts of HIV/AIDS and associated infections in the Baltic Sea Region by joint international activities” project, which was granted the EUSBSR Seed Money Facility financing.

The HIV/AIDS&AI EG ITA explained that the project idea came from the HIV/AIDS&AI EG’s recently developed long-term strategy, that it was a small project aimed at planning a bigger regional project and that the project was led by Poland and involved Finland and Russia.

Russia objected to mentioning that Russia was a project partner because there had been no coordination with the Ministry of Health. The project partners were supposed to coordinate with the Ministry of Health, not NGOs. Further, Russia asked how it was possible that the letters of support were issued in the absence of NDPHS criteria and procedure for issuing letters of support for Priority Area Health project applications for submission to the EUSBSR Seed Money Facility presented to 22nd Meeting of the NDPHS CSR.

Latvia suggested to delete the current draft final report from the website and promised to submit further comments regarding the final report in writing.

With reference to document CSR 22/5.2/1, the Secretariatrequested the Meeting to provide guidance on further steps towards adoption of the Work Plan for 2014, including on whether it should be adopted by the CSR or the ministerial PAC 10, as well as the issue of prolongations of the mandates of the EGs and TGs.

The Evaluation Team Chair explained that there were two approaches regarding the continuation of the groups’ activities in 2014: in the evaluation report it was suggested to prolong the current NDPHS Strategy until 2014. However, taking into account that it was clear that several goals and operational targets would not be achieved, the Evaluation Team suggested that the current Strategy should not be prolonged and the groups should focus on the implementation of their work plans for 2014 and development of the NDPHS Strategy beyond 2013 instead.

The PPHS EG Chair reminded that the AMR TG had expressed a wish to be designated as an Expert Group rather than a Task Group.

Russia requested to carefully review the whole Work Plan for 2014 and correct references to the implementation of the EUSBSR, such as those on pages 5, 13 etc. The NDPHS includes non-EU countries and therefore cannot implement the EUSBSR; therefore the “implementation” shall be replaced with “coordination”.

Latvia expressed a support to the Secretariat’s suggestion that the CSR rather than the ministerial PAC should adopt the Work Plan for 2014. Further, it stated that the work plans of the ASA EG, the NCD EG and the AMR TG were too ambitious and the amount of tasks for one year was enormous. It also mentioned that no new EG should be established prior the adoption of new Strategy. It also includes that if it is decided to separate Prison Health from Primary Health EG (which Latvia is in favor) it should be dealt within the new Strategy.The same applies to forming AMR TG into EG.

In response to comment made by Latvia, the NCD EG Chair and the ASA EG ITAexplained that the projects in question had already been developed during the previous years and the groups were waiting for the funding opportunities.

Norwayagreed that the Work Plan for 2014 should be adopted by the CSR rather than the PAC and suggested two textual revisions (as included in Annex 1).

Estonia supported Norway’s proposals for revisions and stated that there were examples when policy discussions had provided very concrete results. Furthermore, it stated that the CSR should share the burden of developing the new strategy by providing a strategic-level guidance.

The ASA EG Chair shared the example on how the ASA EG was looking into bringing in issues that were particularly relevant for cooperation with Russia. The current structure was particularly successful as it allowed focusing on activities that were relevant in many contexts – the BEAC, the bilateral Norwegian – Russian cooperation, as well as integration with the EU.

The Meeting took note of the provided information and comments, and:

  • Regarding the final reports of the Expert and Task Groups:

1)Requested to make the current draft final report password-protected;

2)Requested the Expert and Task Groups to finalize their reports for 2010-2013 in accordance with the comments presented during and after the meeting and provide input to the Goal 1 to the Secretariat within one week;

3)Invited the next EG Chairs and ITAs meeting to discuss the draft report on the implementation of the NDPHS Strategy in 2010-2013 and decide on its finalization;

4)Requested the Secretariat, in cooperation and with support of the Expert and Task Groups, to submit the final draft report on the implementation of the NDPHS Strategy in 2010-2013 to the CSR members for comments at least one month before the CSR 23 in spring 2014;

5)Agreed that the CSR 23 will thoroughly discuss the final report on the implementation of the NDPHS Strategy in 2010-2013 and decide, as appropriate;

  • Regarding the Work Plan for 2014:

6)Agreed that the Work Plan for 2014 shall be revised in accordance with the comments presented during and after the meeting;[2]

7)Requested the ADPY TG to submit its Work Plan for 2014 no later than 31 October, to be included in the NDPHS Work Plan;

8)Agreed that the revised Work Plan for 2014 shall be disseminated for adoption by the CSR together with the meeting minutes;

9)Agreed that the Work Plan for 2014 shall not be presented to the ministerial level PAC;

  • Regarding the mandates of the Expert and Task Groups:

10)Decided to prolong the mandates of all Expert and Task Groups, except the IMHAP TG, until the adoption of the NDPHS Strategy 2014-2020;

11)Agreed that issues regarding the possible split of the PPHS EG and designation of the AMR TG as an Expert Group shall be addressed during the strategy development process.

12)Decided that further on the appointment of experts to the working groups and approval of the projects should be coordinated with the relevant national ministries.

6.3 NDPHS role vis-à-vis the EUSBSR Seed Money Facility

With reference to document CSR 22/5.3/1, the Secretariat introduced “Draft NDPHS criteria and procedure for issuing letters of support for Priority Area Health project applications for submission to the EUSBSR Seed Money Facility.” It explained that, by issuing a letter of support, the NDPHS Secretariat would confirm that a given project adheres to the priorities listed in the EUSBSR Action Plan. Further, with reference to document CSR 22/5.3/Info 1, the Secretariat provided an overview of the EUSBSR Seed Money Facility support letters issued thus far, including for the project “Strengthening prevention and reduction of impacts of HIV/AIDS and associated infections in the Baltic Sea Region by joint international activities”, which had already been granted funding during the first application round in spring 2013.

Russia commented that in Annex 1 of the document CSR 22/5.3/1in the information flow chart a sentence should be added between the first and second square saying that the Secretariat should notify the Partner Countries and Ministries of Health before the seed money application is submitted to the Seed Money Facility. The assessment by the Partner Countries was required to ensure that all the projects would serve the needs of the countries. Furthermore, Russia requested to recall the letters of support to the two projects where Russia was mentioned as the partner because the criteria for issuing the letters of support had not been approved yet.