----

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Working together, working better: A new framework for the open coordination of social protection and inclusion policies in the European Union

COM(2005) 706 final

(2006/C 185/15)

On 22 December 2005 the Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 20 March 2006. The rapporteur was Mr Olsson.

At its 426th plenary session, held on 20 and 21 April 2006 (meeting of 20 April), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 31 votes in favour, no votes against and one abstention.

1.   EESC's position in brief

2.   Summary of the Commission document

3.   General comments

4.   Specific comments

Involvement of actors

4.8   Transparency

For participation to be meaningful, the stakeholders must have early access to key documents on policy issues. Transparency is also needed when the EU Commission and the Member States analyse and evaluate the new framework, for instance when carrying out peer reviews and identifying indicators.

4.9   Mutual learning and good practice

Learning from each other is of paramount importance in all three strands. Efficient systems for transferring best practice and exploiting non-legislative measures must be developed. The exchange of experience and mutual learning must include decision-makers at all levels. Since social partners and other relevant civil society stakeholders possess unique knowledge and extensive experience of social policies, they must be involved in identifying and evaluating the possibilities for transferring best practice. Horizontal issues that are crucial to the success of the new framework include models for participatory decision-making and the involvement of stakeholders. Another major issue is to find ways and methods to create an inclusive society for all. Lastly there is a need to reconcile social protection with competitiveness without marginalising groups outside of the labour market. In this respect the EESC refers to the current debates on the lifecycle approach to employment and the balance between flexibility and employment security (8).

4.10   Peer reviews

Peer reviews and the exchange of good practice are helpful instruments because they are concrete and inspire those involved. The Commission must ensure that social partners and other relevant civil society organisations are involved in peer reviews.

4.11   EU Progress programme

Social partners and other relevant civil society organisations must be eligible to carry out projects in all strands of the new Progress programme. In its opinion, the EESC expressed concerns about the modest financial resources of the programme (9). Our concern has grown following the European Council decision on the financial perspectives for 2007-13. The EESC firmly emphasises its earlier call for enough financial resources to be set aside for all strands of the programme, including projects related to social protection and social inclusion.

4.12   Indicators

An analytical approach based on high quality, reliable and comparable indicators is necessary to provide a sufficiently detailed, true picture of progress regarding the objectives. Research resources are needed to identify the relevant indicators. The reliability of collecting and treating data has to be guaranteed. While indicators are being established at both European and national level, the EESC reiterates its call for stakeholders to be invited to take part in formulating and evaluating indicators. (10). Both the SPC and the Member States should take such action.

Qualitative indicators must be developed. It is important that relevant criteria, based on human needs, are reflected in the choice of indicators in order to measure, for instance, accessibility for all to social protection, quality in relation to expectations, as well as user involvement and user-friendly treatment.

There is a need to interlink the indicators used in the OMC with the indicators used in the Lisbon strategy to give a comprehensive picture of progress.

4.13   Enhancing visibility

The EESC has on many occasions stressed that communication between Europe and its citizens is marred by the existing deficit in relevant and transparent information. Since the new framework concerns issues close to the citizens, the EESC underlines the importance of organising a permanent debate at all levels to address future challenges and strategic choices in the areas of social protection, pensions, health care and social inclusion. In this context, the European Commission must also enhance the visibility of its own actions. Proposals for how to promote such a debate within the context of the Lisbon strategy can be found in other opinions (11).

5.   Supplementary comments on the objectives

Brussels, 20 April 2006.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

----

(1)  See the EESC opinion on The Employment Guidelines: 2005 – 2008, rapporteur Mr Henri Malosse. OJ C 286, 17.11.2005.

(2)  See the EESC opinion on The road to the European knowledge-based society – the contribution of organised civil society to the Lisbon Strategy (Exploratory opinion), rapporteur: Mr Jan Olsson, co-rapporteurs: Ms Eva Belabed and Mr Joost van Iersel. OJ C 65, 17.3.2006.

(3)  See the EESC opinion on Strengthening the social dimension of the Lisbon strategy: Streamlining open coordination in the field of social protection, rapporteur Mr Wilfreid Beirnaert OJ C 32, 5.2.2004.

(4)  See the EESC Opinion on the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee: Supporting national strategies for safe and sustainable pensions through an integrated approach, rapporteur: Ms Giacomina Cassina, OJ C 48, 21.2.2002, page 101.

(5)  See the EESC ongoing work on Social cohesion: fleshing out a European social model, SOC/237 and on a Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems, SOC/197.

(6)  See the EESC opinion on Communication from the Commission on the Social Agenda, p. 1.2, rapporteur Ms Engelen-Kefer. OJ C 294, 25.11.2005.

(7)  Implementation of the Lisbon Strategy, contributions following mandate from the European Council of 22 and 23 March 2005.

(8)  See the EESC ongoing work on Flexicurity: the case of Denmark, rapporteur: Ms Anita Vium, ECO167 and the EESC opinion on The road to the European knowledge-based society – the contribution of organised civil society to the Lisbon Strategy (exploratory opinion), rapporteur: Mr Jan Olsson, co-rapporteurs: Ms Eva Belabed and Mr Joost van Iersel. OJ C 65, 17.3.2006.

(9)  See the EESC opinion on Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Community Programme for Employment and Social Solidarity – PROGRESS, rapporteur: Mr Wolfgang Greif, OJ C 255, 14.10.2005.

(10)  See the EESC opinion on Social Indicators (own-initiative Opinion), Rapporteur: Ms Giacomina Cassina, OJ C 221, 19.09.2002.

(11)  See the EESC opinion on The Commission's contribution to the period of reflection and beyond: Plan D for Democracy, Dialogue and Debate (own-initiative Opinion), Rapporteur: Ms Jillian van Turnhout, CESE 1499/2005 and the EESC opinion on The road to the European knowledge-based society – the contribution of organised civil society to the Lisbon Strategy (exploratory opinion), rapporteur: Mr Jan Olsson, co-rapporteurs: Ms Eva Belabed and Mr Joost van Iersel. OJ C 65, 17.3.2006.

(12)  European Commission working document Guidelines for Preparing National Reports on Strategies for Social Protection and Social Inclusion.

(13)  Lisbon European Council of March 2000.

----