Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - Proposal for the Joint Report on Social Protection and Social Inclusion 2010 SEC(2010)98 SEC(2010)99
Date: 2010-02-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European social policy, housing, marginalisation, pension scheme, poverty, public health, report, social integration, social security, unemployment

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 5.2.2010 
COM(2010)25 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

Proposal for the Joint Report on Social Protection and Social Inclusion 2010 

SEC(2010)98 
 SEC(2010)99 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

Proposal for the Joint Report on Social Protection and Social Inclusion 2010 

Key Messages 

Firm policy intervention and the automatic stabilizers embedded in European welfare systems 
have limited the economic and social impact of the worst recession in decades. However, the 
human cost of the crisis is difficult to evaluate fully as yet. The impact on labour markets and 
on  the  population,  notably  the  most  vulnerable,  is  still  unfolding.  Investing  in  regular 
monitoring of social trends and  enhancing social statistics  is  crucial for designing early and 
effective policy responses and assessing their impact. 

The crisis has highlighted great diversity within the EU. Its scope, magnitude and effects vary 
as  does  the  capacity  of  national  welfare  systems  to  provide  adequate  protection.  Not  all 
Member States have the financial means to meet rising demand and some have large gaps in 
their safety nets. Narrowing these gaps is now a priority.  

At  the  same  time,  the  need  to  contain  the  rise  in  public  spending  calls  for  enhancing  the 
quality of intervention, and in some  cases  setting clear priorities. This means  more effective 
and  efficient  social  inclusion  and  social  protection,  in  line  with  the  principles  of  access  for 
all, adequacy and sustainability.  

Unemployment may remain high for some time, with risks of long-term exclusion. Fighting 
unemployment  and  promoting  inclusive  labour  markets  should  go  hand  in  hand.  With 
recovery  underway,  policies  need  to  prepare  people  to  grasp  job  opportunities,  promote 
quality  jobs  and  avoid  long-term  dependency.  Active  inclusion  can  reconcile  the  goals  of 
fighting  poverty,  increasing  labour  market  participation,  and  enhancing  efficiency  of  social 
spending.  

Renewed attention shall be paid to old and new forms of poverty and exclusion, in ageing and 
rapidly  changing  societies,  opened  to  globalisation  and  population  flows.  Preventing  and 
tackling  poverty,  child  poverty  in  particular,  is  crucial  to  prepare  Europe  for  the  future, 
avoiding a waste of the human potential, of both women and men.  

The crisis has aggravated poverty in its multiple aspects, for instance housing exclusion. Over 
the last decade, affordability, homelessness, social and housing polarisation and new forms of 
housing  deprivation  have  been  an  increasing  concern  for  public  policy,  which  in  this  field 
often  lacks  adequate  information  and  evaluation  systems.  Integrated  strategies  to  address 
housing  exclusion  and  homelessness  have  an  important  role  to  play  in  post-crisis  policies, 
with a view to build cohesive and environmentally sustainable societies. 

Economic  distress  undermines  mental  and  physical  health  and  threatens  to  deepen  health 
inequalities.  The  impact  of  the  crisis  will  vary  with  the  initial  health  situations  and  the 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
capacities  of  Member  States  to  address  the  challenges.  Increasing  demand  coupled  with 
severe  budget  pressure  gives  new  urgency  to  the  efficiency  of  health  care  systems.  The 
challenge is to improve efficiency while ensuring access for all to quality healthcare. 

Pensioners  have  been  relatively  little  affected  so  far,  although  cuts  in  payments  in  some 
countries with high poverty rates among the elderly are a cause of concern. Still, the crisis and 
lower growth prospects are likely to impact on all types of pension schemes and aggravate the 
ageing  challenge.  As  pensions 
life-time  earnings-related 
contributions,  pension  adequacy  will  depend  on  the  ability  of  labour  markets  to  deliver 
opportunities for longer and more complete contributory careers. 

increasingly  depend  on 

A marked shift towards funded provision brings forward some of the costs of future pensions 
in an ageing society. It also increases the exposure of pension systems to financial markets. 
Variations  in  the  ability  of  funded  schemes  to  weather  the  crisis  show  that  differences  in 
design,  regulation  and  investment  strategy  matter.  Better  balancing  security  for  savers  and 
affordability against potential gains and losses will be important.  

The crisis has emphasised the added value of policy co-ordination through the Open Method 
of  Coordination  on  Social  Protection  and  Social  Inclusion  (Social  OMC)  and  provided 
further incentive to exploit its potential fully. The joint monitoring of the social impact of the 
crisis  has  emphasized  the  value  of  mutual  learning  and  exchange  of  good  practice.  It  has 
increased awareness and helped facing common challenges. 

Drawing on the lessons of the crisis and of ten years of the Lisbon strategy, there will be a 
need  to  foster  sustainable  growth  along  with  job  creation  and  social  cohesion  and 
systematically  assess  progress  of  social  outcomes,  including  gender  equality.  The  European 
Year 2010 for combating poverty and social exclusion offers a timely opportunity to strongly 
reaffirm  the  commitment,  made  by  the  EU  ten  years  ago,  for  a  decisive  impact  on  the 
eradication of poverty and social exclusion. 

1.   

INTRODUCTION 

Strong  policy  intervention  and  automatic  stabilisers  played  a  major  role  in  mitigating  the 
social consequences of the crisis. However, the full impact of the crisis on people is yet to be 
faced. The Commission forecasts that unemployment could exceed 10% in 2010, with social 
expenditure rising from 27.5% to 30.8% of GDP between 2007 and 2010.  

With 5 million more unemployed than at the outset of the crisis, income has dropped for many 
households, exposing them to poverty and over indebtedness, and some have lost their homes. 
Migrants,  younger  and  older  workers,  and  those  on  temporary  contracts,  especially  women, 
were  affected  early  on,  but  unemployment  is  touching  other  categories,  hitherto  fairly  safe. 
Unemployment  rates  may  stay  high  for  some  time,  with  the  attendant  risks  of  long-term 
unemployment and exclusion. 

The nature, size and effects of the crisis differ within EU. Unemployment rose from 2.7% to 
3.9% in one country and  from  6.0%  to  20.9% in  another. Also, Member  States started with 
different  social  situations.  In  2008,  at-risk-of  poverty  rates  ranged  from  9%  to  26%.  The 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
coverage and level of support provided by social protection also varied across countries and 
social groups. Public perceptions echo these disparities: in June 09 while the majority felt the 
crisis had increased poverty, those who sensed a profound impact ranged from 10% to 69%. 

Policy responses also vary in scale and emphasis. The Commission estimates that spending 
on discretionary measures varies from less than 1% of GDP in some countries to more than 
3.5% in others. The Commission forecasts that between 2007 and 2010 social spending will 
rise, by less than 1 pp in three countries and up to 6 pp or more in another four.  

Member States used the European Social Funds to enhance support to the unemployed, to 
keep  workers  in  employment  and  to  help  the  most  vulnerable  facing  structural  barriers  to 
labour market integration. They used flexibility in the ESF adjusting operational programmes, 
modifying them where necessary, and used the simplifications proposed by the Commission 
to improve the effectiveness of the fund. ESF programmes also provide financial support for 
long-term EU social inclusion objectives, underpinning the recovery and social cohesion.  

The crisis emphasises the need to support citizens at a time of major budget constraint. This 
highlights  the  EU  agenda  for  more  effective  and  efficient  social  inclusion  and  social 
protection, pursuing access for all, adequacy and sustainability; which is a long term concern 
of the Social OMC. Short-term responses should be consistent with structural reforms needed 
to  modernise  social  policy,  prevent  lasting  damage  to  the  economy  and  society  and  prepare 
for long-term challenges, such as ageing.  

2.   

EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT SOCIAL INCLUSION POLICIES IN AND AFTER THE CRISIS  

Unemployment in the EU is now at 9.1%, and could reach 10.3% in 2010. The rate is more 
than double for young workers (20.7%) and migrants (19.1%). The loss of earnings affects 
all family members, and especially children and other dependants. Young people are also 
affected by the lack of job opportunities. The maturing of pensions systems has helped reduce 
poverty risks for the elderly in many countries. However, the crisis threatens the development 
of adequate pensions where elderly poverty remains very high.  

The crisis is also likely to affect those furthest from the labour market, either inactive or 
long-term  unemployed.  Even  beforehand,  the  low  skilled,  people  with  disabilities  or  mental 
health  problems,  migrant  –  particularly  women  -  had  limited  access  to  training  and  other 
enabling services. Recent efforts to boost employability for all may be undermined by lack of 
jobs and increased pressure on training and employment services.  

Maintaining decent living standards for all is both crucial to ensure that people live in dignity, 
and to sustain their employability and learning capacity. Overall, most Europeans can rely on 
some of the most effective safety nets in the world. However, there are gaps. 

The  effectiveness  of  unemployment  benefits  vary  greatly  depending  on  the  coverage, 
duration,  conditionality  and  replacement  rate  of  the  benefits.  Young  workers  with  short 
contributory  records  and  some  of  the  self-employed  may  not  be  entitled  to  unemployment 
benefits, while workers on part-time or temporary contracts often receive lower benefits than 
other workers. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
Reforms  to  strengthen  work  incentives  have  tightened  eligibility  criteria,  or  reduced  the 
level or duration of entitlements. Together with a greater emphasis on activation measures, 
these reforms contributed to a reduction in long-term unemployment. However, they have not 
always  reduced  long-term  welfare  dependency.  In  addition,  even  though  several  Member 
States  prolonged  benefit  duration  and  relaxed  eligibility  rules  in  response  to  the  crisis,  the 
pressure on last-resort schemes has started to increase, as unemployment benefits run out for 
more  and  more  people.  This  underlines  the  need  to  prepare  comprehensive  exit  strategies 
based on active inclusion principles. 

The coverage and adequacy of minimum income provisions vary greatly across EU. In most 
countries, social assistance alone is not sufficient to lift people out of poverty, but in general it 
reduces its intensity. Recent efforts to modernise social assistance have focused on financial 
incentives to work; but, the lack of clear mechanisms to up-rate minimum incomes has often 
led  to  deterioration  in  benefit  adequacy  over  time.  In  all  countries,  non-take-up 
significantly  affects  the  effectiveness  of  the  schemes,  though  to  various  degrees.  Complex 
rules, lack of information, discretionary assessment, administrative errors and fear of stigma 
are  some  of  the  multiple  reasons  that  explain  non-take  up.  There  is  therefore  room  for 
increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of minimum income schemes.  

Adequate  income  support  is  crucial  for  people  in  time  of  need,  but  policies  must  also  help 
them  to  participate  in  the  labour  market.  Both  spending  and  participation  in  active  labour 
market  measures,  including  life  long  learning,  have  improved  overall  in  recent  years. 
However, more needs to be done to ensure that all are reached, including the low skilled, the 
young  and  the  elderly,  lone  parents  and  those  returning  from  caring  breaks,  migrants,  and 
people with disabilities. Experience shows that long-term unemployment and inactivity tend 
to persist long after recovery. Modern social security schemes are an important tool to prevent 
people moving on to long-term sickness and disability benefits, or early retirement schemes.  

Adequate and individualised social and employment services are also essential to overcome 
structural  barriers  to  participation  in  the  labour  market  and  in  society.  The  personal,  family 
and social hurdles people face need to be addressed by quality social and health services. 

3.  HOMELESSNESS AND HOUSING EXCLUSION  

Shortage of adequate housing is a long-standing problem in most European countries. Over 
the  last  decade,  worsening  affordability,  homelessness,  social  and  housing  polarisation  and 
new forms of housing deprivation have been an increasing concern for public policy. With the 
crisis and rise in unemployment, some countries report more defaults on housing loans and 
repossessions.  Low  incomes  and  high  costs  are  also  responsible  for  increased  evictions. 
Member  States  have  reacted  with  measures  to  protect  mortgage  holders,  strengthen  income 
support  and  improve  the  supply  of  social  and  public  housing.  In  some  cases,  targeted 
measures  have  been  introduced,  such  as  accommodation  for  the  homeless  and  plans  for 
energy efficiency.  

The cost and quality of housing is key to living standards and well-being. 38% of people at-
risk of poverty spend more than 40% of their disposable income on housing – more than twice 
the average for the overall population (19%). They also tend to face worse housing conditions 
than the rest of the population with over 27% in overcrowded accommodation (EU average of 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
15%) and 38% suffering from at least one housing deprivation problem (against 22%). Recent 
national  data  on  rough  sleepers  and  on  people  without  accommodation  give  a  mixed 
picture, but show that the situation has worsened in a number of countries. Proper assessment 
of the problem, which also includes people living in insecure and inadequate accommodation, 
awaits a common EU agreed methodology. 

Almost all Member States identify homelessness and housing exclusion as a concern and have 
adopted national or local strategies that help to raise awareness, improve policy coordination 
and  implementation,  and  identify  resources.  However,  housing  strategies  face  multiple 
challenges.  The  sharing  of  responsibility  for  policy  and  delivery  between  national  and  local 
authorities,  service  providers  and  NGOs  is  often  complex.  The  most  successful  strategies 
display effective governance with strong co-operation between all involved. There is also a 
need for thorough information and evaluation. Recently adopted EU indicators on housing 
costs and deprivation are important, but accurate and consistent data on homelessness is still 
lacking  in  most  Member  States.  Strategies  are  generally  made  more  effective  with  targets 
such  as  on  the  prevention  of  homelessness;  a  reduction  in  its  duration;  targeting  the  most 
severe  homelessness;  the  improvement  of  the  quality  of  services  for  homeless  people  or  on 
the supply of affordable housing. 

The  causes  of  housing  exclusion  can  be  structural  (joblessness,  poverty  or  lack  of  adequate 
and  affordable  housing),  personal  (family  breakdown,  illness),  institutional  (leaving  care  or 
prison)  or  linked  to  discrimination.  Policies  also  need  to  adapt  to  changing  patterns  of 
homelessness,  and  to  new  risk  groups,  such  as  people  with  low-paid,  poor  quality  or 
intermittent jobs, including the young and migrant and mobile workers.  

Tackling  housing  exclusion  and  homelessness  therefore  requires  integrated  policies 
combining  financial  support  to  individuals,  effective  regulation  and  quality  social 
services, including  housing,  employment, health  and welfare services. More attention needs 
to be paid to the quality standards of social services and the specific obstacles the homeless 
face in accessing them.  

Social and public housing are a key element in housing policies, and often the main solution 
for  homelessness.  However,  excess  demand  is  widespread.  In  several  cases,  this  is  due  to  a 
policy  shift  towards  private  housing.  The  quality  of  housing  stocks  remains  a  challenge 
despite efforts to improve standards. The EU structural funds, in particular the ERDF, could 
play an important role in the convergence regions. Concentrations of housing exclusion and 
homelessness can only be addressed through housing and urban regeneration programmes to 
promote sustainable communities and social mix.  

Strategies to address housing exclusion and homelessness have an important role in building 
socially  and  environmentally  sustainable  economies,  and  they  should  be  an  integral  part  of 
post-crisis strategies. 

4.   

IMPROVING  THE  EFFECTIVENESS  AND  EFFICIENCY  OF  HEALTHCARE  SPENDING 
UNDER AGGRAVATED CONDITIONS AND TIGHTER BUDGET CONSTRAINTS 

Data on the health impacts of the crisis are still sparse, but experience shows that downturns 
increase risks to mental and physical health and that negative effects can emerge over time. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
Health  status  is  influenced  by  the  extent  and  duration  of  economic  and  social  deterioration. 
Indirect  effects  may  come  as  budget  constraints  make  it  difficult  to  respond  to  rising 
healthcare needs.  

A  sudden  increase  in  insecurity  is  a  stress  factor  affecting  the  population  at  large.  Job 
uncertainty, restructuring and long-term unemployment significantly affect mental health, are 
linked  to  suicide,  alcohol  and  drug  abuse,  increase  the  risk  of  cardiovascular  disease  and 
impacts  on  mortality.  Moreover,  lower  household  income  can  delay  and  inhibit  recourse  to 
care. This underlines the need to promote labour market inclusion in order to prevent health 
risks. 

The pattern of health impacts across the EU is likely to vary with the depth of the downturn 
and  with  the  strength  of  the  health  sector  and  welfare  policies.  Some  of  the  Member  States 
most affected by the crisis are also among those where the relative health situation is worst 
and  social  and  health  policies  least  developed.  Differences  are  aggravated  by  policy 
responses. While some recovery packages include extra health spending, others have had to 
cut  health  budgets.  Countries  with  lower  overall  health  conditions  and  higher  health 
inequalities  also  have  less  equity  in  access  to  care,  and  spend  least  on  it.  Budget  pressure 
apart, these countries may not be investing enough to secure the health of their populations. In 
these  countries,  higher  and  more  effective  health  care  spending  will  be  needed,  including 
through greater promotion and prevention. 

Large  and  widening  health  inequalities  within  Member  States  show  that  not  all  have 
benefited equally from the economic progress that delivers better health. Avoidable mortality 
and  morbidity  are  a  drain  on  society,  reducing employment,  productivity and  growth, while 
increasing pressure on health budgets. Redressing health inequalities calls for attention to the 
social  determinants  of  health  in  all  policies,  effective  healthcare  delivery,  and  a  re-
examination  of  priorities.  Reducing  health  inequalities  between  Member  States  requires 
greater  consideration  of  health  impacts  in  the  use  of  structural  funds  and  all  European 
policies. 

In the face of increasing needs and tight budgets improving effectiveness and efficiency take 
on a new urgency. Public budgets in most Member States are likely to be pressed for years, 
calling  for  prioritisation,  effectiveness  and  efficiency.  Health  expenditure  is  significant, 
averaging some 9% of GDP and ranging from 5% to 11%. Spending broadly correlates with 
GDP  per  capita  but  actual  expenditure  is  driven  by  a  complex  set  of  factors.  Key  structural 
drivers  include  new  technologies,  rising  expectations,  population  ageing  and  the  increase  in 
unhealthy behaviours.  

The design, organisation and implementation of health care bears closely on the cost/benefit 
ratio, and similar levels of spending can lead to different outcomes. This suggests potential 
gains within the sector, as well as through improvement of the social determinants of health. 
Differences  between  schemes  in  terms  of  expenditure  and  relative  prices  prompt  questions 
about  financing  and  delivery  structures  and  policy  priorities  (e.g.  prevention  versus 
treatment). The health sector also holds great potential for job creation, vital to strategies for 
returning  to  sustainable  growth  and  employment.  Along  with  long-term  care  it  accounts  for 
nearly  10%  of  total  employment,  and  with  population  ageing  demand  for  health  and  social 
services will grow.  

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
5. 

LONGER  TERM  IMPLICATIONS  OF  THE  FINANCIAL  AND  ECONOMIC  CRISIS  FOR 
PENSION SYSTEMS 

Pensioners  have  been  relatively  little  affected  so  far,  cushioned  by  steady  incomes  and  low 
inflation  and  thanks  to  improvements  in  minimum  pensions  in  recent  years.  People  retiring 
now  or  in  the  near  future  are  unlikely  to  be  strongly  affected,  with  exceptions  in  a  few 
Member States. This is because the bulk of pensioner income stems from public pay-as-you-
go schemes which are quite resilient to short-term cyclical fluctuations even though they will 
come under increasing pressure as lower employment reduces contributions and the tax base. 
Moreover, in the few countries where retirement income from funded schemes is important, 
pensions in payment tend to be of defined-benefit type where the investment risk is borne by 
the  scheme  and  not  by  the  individual.  In  a  few  Member  States  cuts  in  already  moderate 
benefits are a concern as poverty rates of older people were already high.  

However,  as  pension  systems  and  their  economic  context  are  changing,  the  longer-term 
implications of the crisis could, if not sufficiently addressed, be rather more serious for future 
pensioners. 

The crisis has exposed the vulnerability of funded schemes to volatility in financial markets 
and  highlighted  the  need  for  policymakers,  regulators  and  supervisors  to  promote  more 
prudent  management  of  people’s  retirement  savings  thus  finding  a  balanced  way  of  reaping 
the advantages of funded schemes. The large range in the losses incurred, and the even greater 
variation in capacities to absorb the shock, highlight that differences in pension fund designs 
and investment strategies matter.  

From  the  variation  in  impacts  across  the  Union,  important  lessons  can  be  drawn  about  how 
funded schemes can be improved and a better balance for pension savers be struck between 
security, affordability and returns. Accordingly, a new agenda is emerging for changes to 
funded  designs  and  for  speedy  completion  of  the  unfinished  parts  of  the  new  mandatory 
schemes (e.g. concerning more secure default options, life-styling, charge capping, rules for 
annuitisation  and  the  pay-out  phase).  Achieving  this  will  be  an  important  part  of  rebuilding 
public  confidence  in  funded  pensions.  The  crisis  has,  furthermore,  underlined  how  pension 
funds will have to be included in measures to stabilise financial markets. The need for better 
regulation would also have a European dimension. 

Importantly, the longer-term challenge of ageing has been put into sharper focus. The balance 
between  adequacy  and  sustainability  -  the  object  of  a  decade  of  pension  reforms  -  is  under 
further pressure from the financial and economic crisis. Increased employment rates for older 
workers and women must now be defended against rising unemployment. Recovery packages 
have  secured  the  ground  for  economic  growth,  but  they  have  also  reduced  the  hard-won 
public  finance  improvements  intended  to  provide  room  for  extra  expenditure  to  address 
ageing. This lost ground will have to be regained.  

Future  pensioners  are  likely  to  be  more  exposed  to  the  fluctuations  of  financial  and  labour 
markets.  The  importance  of  funded  provision,  especially  of  the  defined  contribution  type 
where  investments  risks  are  typically  borne  by  pension  savers,  is  set  to  increase  markedly. 
Pensions  from  pay-as-you-go  schemes  will,  likewise,  increasingly  be  based  on  life-time 
earnings-related  contributions,  and  on  present  trends  only  those  with  very  long  careers  and 
largely  unbroken  contributory  records  will  obtain  rights  to  a  full  (maximum)  pension.  This 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
trend will have a particularly strong impact on women. Adequacy will not just depend on the 
ability of workers to respond positively to the new work incentives in pension systems. It will 
also  be  contingent  on  the  ability  of  labour  markets  to  deliver  sufficient  opportunities  for 
longer and less broken careers.  

The reform measures introduced by most Member States to ensure more sustainable pension 
systems  represent  a  very  important  step  but  need  to  be  broadened  to  ensure  provision  of 
adequate pension benefits. Attaining this will require that people work more and longer. Apart 
from pension reforms, this would entail further measures to boost labour market performance 
and a wider range of sources for retirement income.  

In collaboration with the EPC, the SPC intends to re-assess the advances of the last decade of 
pension  reforms  in  the  light  of  crisis  setbacks  and  the  accentuated  challenges  of  securing 
adequate and sustainable pensions in a context of lower growth and accelerating ageing. 

6.   

GOVERNANCE 

Since  of  the  onset  of  the  crisis,  the  Commission  and  the  SPC  have  engaged  in  a  joint 
monitoring  of  the  social  impact  of  the  crisis,  highlighting  emerging  social  problems  and 
new  policy  measures.  This  exercise  was  presented  to  the  Council  and  entailed  in-depth 
examination  of  specific  social  policy  challenges,  such  as  minimum  income  schemes  and 
funded  pensions.  It  has  provided  new  opportunities  for  mutual  learning  and  exchange  of 
good practice and increased awareness and understanding of common challenges.  

The need to react swiftly to the crisis has led many Member States to reinforce their capacity 
to  detect  social  problems  and  intensify  cooperation  among  social  and  institutional  actors. 
They  have  enlarged  their  knowledge  base  on  the  social  impact  of  the  crisis,  using 
administrative data or specific monitoring tools, including new surveys. Steps were taken to 
improve the timeliness of EU social surveys. 

Countries with established governance arrangements and practices have benefited from the 
engagement and mobilisation of stakeholders. Social partners have often played a key role in 
designing  and  implementing  short  term  labour  market  measures  to  maintain  people  in  jobs. 
Local authorities and NGOs across Europe had to meet increased demand for social benefits 
and  services  while  often  seeing  their  own  revenue  squeezed.  Cooperation  and  coordination 
among these actors has been a valuable asset.  

In  September  2009,  the  SPC  adopted  a  Report  –  “Growth  Jobs  and  Social  Progress”  – 
showing that in the last decade, the benefits of growth have not been evenly distributed and 
that poverty and social exclusion remain a major issue in most EU countries, although with 
substantial  differences  across  Europe.  This  calls  for  a  systematic  assessment  of  progress  on 
social  outcomes,  including  gender  equality.  To  this  end,  reinforcing  the  Social  OMC  by 
increasing its effectiveness and visibility is essential.  

The European Year 2010 for combating poverty and social exclusion will help to generate 
new impetus by raising awareness, reinforcing partnerships and reaching out to new actors. It 
should  lead  the  EU  to  strongly  reaffirm  the  commitment  made  ten  years  ago  to  make  a 
decisive impact on the eradication of poverty and social exclusion. 

EN 

9 

   EN