In the formulation and implementation of policies the structure of government and administration is a key determinate of how policies are developed and implemented. Within the partner countries in the MSI project a range of different political and administrative arrangements are found, from centralised systems, such as Ireland, Norway and Portugal, to a regional structure with a high degree of autonomy with regard to internal policy-making (in particular in social policies) as in Northern Ireland, to a mix of both centralised and decentralised systems, such as in the Czech Republic and France.
Forms of Governance and Devolved Policy-making on Social Inclusion in MSI Partner Countries
| Country |
Central Government |
Regional Government |
Local Government |
| Bulgaria |
Central Government |
|
|
| Czech Republic |
Central Government |
Regions with substantial devolved powers |
Municipalities with substantial devolved powers |
| France |
Central Government |
Regions with devolved powers |
Départements and Communes with devolved powers |
| Ireland |
Central Government |
|
Local Authorities working within the national policy framework |
| The Netherlands |
Central Government |
|
Local Authorities with very substantial devolved powers |
| Norway |
Central Government |
|
Local Authorities working within the national policy framework |
| Portugal |
Central Government |
|
Local authorities working within national and regional policy frameworks |
| United Kingdom |
Central Government |
Region of the UK with substantial transferred powers |
Local authorities working with the regional policy framework |
Structures for Social Inclusion in the Administrations of the MSI Partner Countries
Within the context of the governmental structures and the resources allocated to the development of policies directed at promoting social inclusion, the partner countries in the MSI project have all designated the co-ordination of the preparation of the NAPs/inclusion to a specific office or unit of government. It is the role of these designated offices to take overall responsibility for the consultation process (in particular with civil society organisations), the drafting of the plan, getting agreement across government, the organisation of the peer reviews and liaison with the European Commission.
How do these structures work? In the European Commission's Staff Paper "Joint Report on Social Protection and Social Inclusion: Technical Annex, (SEC(2005)69)", commenting on the three waves of NAPs/inclusion to date (2001, 2003 and 2004), the following observations are made:
Government Structures and European Commission Comments
| Country |
Czech Republic |
| Responsible Office/Unit |
Social Services Department within the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs |
| European Commission Comments |
|
While it is not overly ambitious in launching new policy measures, the NAP makes an important step in mainstreaming the social inclusion process into other public policies. However, the general strategic approach remains sometimes implicit and the NAP implementation and monitoring measures should be further clarified. The NAP has helped bring together all relevant actors in the field, but had the process received more political visibility, more could have been achieved.
|
| Country |
France |
| Responsible Office/Unit |
Designated office within the Ministry of Solidarity, Health and Family |
| European Commission Comments |
|
| The NAP/inclusion, 2003-5, and its update presented in September, 2004, are based on the continuation of a strategy established in 1998 which takes account of the multi-dimensional character of social exclusion and which gives priority to promoting access or the return to the labour market. The measures set out in the NAP and in the law for social cohesion, 2005-2009, constitute a major new investment in three areas: employment; housing; and equal opportunities. France has chosen not to establish an overall objective for poverty reduction but has, instead, adopted quantitative objectives which partially cover the range of policies and which often relate more to measures of policy implementation than policy outcomes. |
| Country |
Republic of Ireland |
| Responsible Office/Unit |
Office for Social Inclusion, Dept of Social and Family Affairs |
| European Commission Comments |
|
| The NAP 2003-2005 involves the adoption of a range of new targets and the creation of new institutional structures. It also breaks new ground in the way it acknowledges the multi-dimensional aspects of poverty and social exclusion. A new framework to tackle social exclusion and been established, with overall co-ordination and responsibility allocated to a new Office for Social Inclusion. Given its wide remit and ambitious work programme, it will be necessary to ensure that adequate resources are applied to this Office. A wide ranging consultation process and the establishment of a Social Inclusion Forum have increased civic society involvement. |
| Country |
Portugal |
| Responsible Office/Unit |
Institute of Social Security, Ministry of Labour and Social Solidarity |
| European Commission Comments |
|
| The NAP is a fairly straight continuation of the overall strategy presented in 2001 and contains little innovation. The Plan presents a rather broad list of principles, strategic aims and priorities and a wide panoply of instruments, but falls short from identifying sources of funding and budgets for the main measures. For this reason, it is difficult to establish what the true priorities are and how the strategic objectives tie in with the implementation of the measures. A key measure of the NAP is the 'Social Network', which is to be extended and stepped up in order to mobilise all stakeholders. |
| Country |
Northern Ireland |
| Responsible Office/Unit |
Designated office within the UK Dept of Work and Pensions and from Northern Ireland the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister contributes to the preparation of the UK NAP/inclusion |
| European Commission Comments |
|
| The second UK NAP (2003-05) maintains the process of developing a broad and comprehensive strategy. Facilitating access to employment for those capable of working is at the centre of the strategic approach and has been helped by continued good economic and employment growth. The strategy also envisages the provision of good income support and high quality social services to those who cannot access work. The strategy involves commitment to a number of targets, supported by national indicators, most notably the aim of eradicating child poverty by 2020. The process of creating the second NAP also shows a greater degree of openness and involvement of relevant stakeholders. |