Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Decision No 253/2000/EC establishing the second phase of the Community action programme in the field of education "Socrates"

(COM(2002) 193 final)

(2002/C 241/18)

On 7 June 2002, the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned 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 June 2002. The rapporteur was Mr Bernabei.

At its 392nd Plenary Session (meeting of 17 July 2002), the Economic and Social Committee unanimously adopted the following opinion.

1. Introduction

1.1. The Socrates programme is based upon Articles 149 and 150 of the EC Treaty which state that the Community shall contribute to the development of quality education by encouraging cooperation between Member States through a series of measures including mobility, exchanges of information, teaching the languages of the Member States and promoting lifelong learning for all EU citizens.

1.2. The Community supports and supplements the action of Member States in the field of education, respecting the responsibility of Member States for the content and organisation of national education systems. Moreover, the focus of Community policy as defined at the Lisbon and Stockholm European Councils is the sustainable development of the European economy as the most competitive knowledge-based economy in the world. The conclusions of the Barcelona European Council gave education "for the first time, its own significant specific weight, and at the same time underline its importance for achieving other goals such as professional mobility and full employment; we can therefore say that, in future, education will be a fundamental and indispensable element of the process of European construction."(1)

1.3. In particular, the Barcelona European Council asked the Commission to take immediate steps to implement five actions: ensure the transparency of diplomas and qualifications, especially concerning vocational training; encourage foreign language learning; promote the European dimension in education in Member States; activate the Work Programme on objectives for education and training systems; and adopt the Resolution on Lifelong Learning before the June 2002 European Council in Seville.

1.4. The second phase of the Socrates programme, covering 2000-2006, was adopted on 24 January 2000 by Decision No 253/2000/EC of the European Parliament and the Council, with a budget of EUR 1850 million. The programme is an integral part of the proposed strategy and focuses on eight action lines:

- Comenius, for schools

- Erasmus, for higher education

- Grundtvig, for adult education and other forms of education

- Lingua, for foreign language learning

- Minerva, for information and communication technology development in education

- Observation and Innovation of education systems and policies

- Joint initiatives with other European programmes

- Accompanying measures, for awareness-raising, dissemination, improved management and horizontal priorities, such as fostering equal opportunities and inter-cultural education.

1.5. The Committee gave its views on the launch of the second phase of the Socrates programme in an opinion(2) which underscored its support for the objectives of the programme. The Commission will present a mid-term assessment of the implementation of the programme to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions by 30 June 2004 at the latest.

1.6. On 28 February 2002, the European Parliament adopted a Report and a Resolution on the implementation of the Socrates Programme(3), in accordance with its right and duty to check that expenditure was managed in the most efficient way consonant with the attainment of the objectives of the adopted programme. The Report identifies structural problems, inadequate coordination with other programmes, cumbersome and complex procedures and red tape, poor programme information, poor dissemination of results and inadequate monitoring and evaluation. The Parliament called for increased and better coordination, simplification and streamlining of procedures, clear agreements with National Agencies and improved monitoring and control, without however hampering implementation.

1.7. On 12 March 2002, the Court of Auditors, in turn, presented a Special Report(4) highlighting the design weaknesses complicating the structure of the programme, the 38 highly heterogeneous actions, complicated cooperation between Member States, assessment hampered by unclear criteria and parameters and lack of an appropriate framework for synergy with other Community programmes. The Court also found shortcomings in aspects of management, both concerning centralised management in the Technical Assistance Office and the decentralised management of National Agencies, through lack of an adequate status, insufficient resources and the lack of a legal framework defining responsibilities. Lastly, the Court detailed shortcomings in the evaluation reports, the impact of which it considers arguable.

1.8. In its replies to the Court, the Commission emphasised that it should not underestimate the tension between defending the need for strict management, the need to adopt user-friendly management methods which respect the principle of proportionality regarding the modest amounts of funding involved, and the need to simplify the access and management of a programme which benefits 70 million young people, over 4.5 million teachers, approximately 12 million students from 5000 higher education establishments as well as millions of adults following full or part-time courses within the European Union and in candidate countries.

1.9. The new Socrates II programme is based on a framework including indicators, a timetable, measures for standardising and comparing data and the presentation of national reports by the end of 2003. It provides for the development of networks of National Agencies by adopting measures to define responsibilities and the phasing out of the Technical Assistance Office, in anticipation of an executive agency. The programme confirms the need for a certain degree of flexibility in implementation and introduces measures to simplify control and monitoring procedures.

1.10. Against this backdrop, the purpose of the present proposal for a decision is to reduce the administrative burden, excessive in comparison to the modest level of funding concerned - on average, EUR 3315 per project in 2000 - and correct the disincentive for small establishments, such as primary schools. At the same time, the proposal forms a response to Decision No 253/2000/EC which stipulates that, as a general rule, Community aid should not amount to more than 75 % of the total costs of each individual project.

2. The Commission proposal

2.1. The proposal is designed to amend the legislation on the second phase of the Socrates programme in order to introduce a greater degree of flexibility in the co-financing procedure, over and above the 75 % ceiling established in that legislation.

2.2. In accordance with the Commission's commitment to the principles of simplification and proportionality as laid down in the White Paper on Reforming the Commission(5), the Commission considers that it should not apply "a new requirement on the institutions participating in projects within the decentralised actions of the programme to account for the contribution towards their realisation made by staff employed by these institutions, solely in order to demonstrate that the Community grant does not normally exceed 75 % of the total costs of the project".

2.3. The Commission therefore proposes amending the first paragraph of section IV(B)(2) of Decision No 253/2000/EC in order to provide appropriate flexibility in applying this co-financing requirement.

2.4. In this context, eliminating the specific requirement for recipients to provide proof of their contribution to co-financing equal to a minimum of 25 % of the total costs of the project, enables them to continue to apply and report entirely on the basis of direct costs, without having to justify spending for staff necessarily employed to carry out the project itself.

2.5. According to the Commission proposal, this is a purely technical amendment with no repercussions in terms of finances or human resources. It does not imply any departure from the principle of requiring the recipient of a Community grant to co-finance the project, which is enshrined in the new financial regulations for Socrates II. This requirement would, in any case, be satisfied by involving members of staff of the recipient establishment in carrying out the project.

3. Comments

3.1. The Committee endorses the Commission proposal to the extent that it aims to strike the correct balance between the basic principle of co-financing on the one hand - with the recipients taking an active and responsible part in the project by contributing staff and time alongside the Community funding - and the need for simplification, less red tape and promotion of synergies on the other hand. These should be the hallmarks of action to create quality human resources and strengthen European cooperation in the field of education and training, in the light of the Lisbon strategy and the objectives set at Stockholm and at the Barcelona European Council in March 2002.

3.2. The Committee therefore welcomes the proposal for a technical amendment regarding the method of granting financial aid to projects organised under this programme. Nonetheless, it considers that several aspects of the issues raised by the Resolution of the European Parliament of 28 February 2002 and by the Court of Auditors' Special Report No 2/2002 of 12 March 2002 have not been dealt with and merit further analysis and solutions.

3.3. In particular, over and above the revision to apply the principles of simplification and proportionality to the co-financing procedure, the following needs should be addressed:

- ensuring coherence, coordination and transparency for the vast and complex web of decentralised actions in an enlarged Union of 25-28 Member States,

- improving information and the dissemination of results through appropriate data networks and the development of the Symmetry Information Management System,

- increased and enhanced synergies with other Community programmes, especially with a view to creating a European Education and Research Area by activating joint initiatives which have been planned but have yet to be carried out,

- ensuring the efficiency of the new system of indicators, standardisation and comparability of data, monitoring and control in order to carry out impact assessments, with a view to boosting the programming potential and direction of actions under the Socrates programme, without causing an unnecessary and unconstructive administrative burden for recipients,

- further streamlining and accelerating procedures, especially those regarding the payment of often very modest amounts of funding.

3.4. The Committee therefore asks the Commission to give due attention to these issues and to the measures deemed appropriate, in the interim evaluation report on the implementation of the Socrates II programme which it is to submit to the European Economic and Social Committee by 30 June 2004.

Brussels, 17 July 2002.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke Frerichs

(1) Declaration of the Spanish Presidency at the Education and Youth Council of 30.5.2002

(2) OJ C 410, of 30.12.1998.

(3) A5 0021/2002

(4) Special Report No 2/2002 of 12.3.2002 on the Socrates and Youth for Europe Community action programmes

(5) COM(2000) 200 final/2.