14
EUROPEAN DEMOCRACY Build an Active Stakeholder Dialogue in Key Policy Areas Europe 2020 is the EU strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. It has targets for employment, education, research and development, climate change, and poverty. Member States prepare annual National Reform Programmes, that follow guidelines of the European Commission. Member States set national targets in these areas. They identify bottlenecks and set out ways to overcome these and achieve the targets. The National Reform Programme is assessed by the European Commission. The social open method of coordination (OMC) was based on three pillars of social inclusion, pensions and health and long-term care. Member States set common objectives, agreed indicators to measure progress and prepared national strategies. The European Commission and Council assessed these strategies in a joint report. This social OMC contributed to learning on good practice but had a limited impact on policy and practice to combat poverty. The European Council (EPSCO) of June 2011 promised a stronger social OMC including greater stakeholder involvement at EU and national levels. Member States now, however, only prepare an annual national social report which is assessed by the Commission and should involve stakeholder participation. Europe 2020 includes a target of reducing the numbers living in poverty by 20m by 2020 . The problems identified in stakeholder involvement at a European Union level included limitations in the short time allowed, the narrow focus and the range of stakeholders involved. The European Commission requires stakeholders to be involved in the preparation of national plans and programmes in these policy areas. National, regional and local authorities as well as social partners and civil society are to be involved. This involvement has been found to be inadequate across the EU. A more deliberative process is required for a shared assessment of evidence and issues and a shared identification of strategies and policies. Claiming our Future should campaign for: Regular, meaningful and structured ways to involve stakeholders at national and European levels in all stages of EU policy processes.

Claiming our Future

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

The slides provide an outline of some of the issues Claiming our Future may incorporate into its agenda for change. Participants at the Reinventing our Democracy event on May 26 in Croke Park will have the opportunity to decide the proposals that Claiming our Future should prioritize

Citation preview

Page 1: Claiming our Future

EUROPEAN DEMOCRACY

Build an Active Stakeholder Dialogue in Key Policy Areas

Europe 2020 is the EU strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. It has targets for employment, education, research and development, climate change, and poverty. Member States prepare annual National Reform Programmes, that follow guidelines of the European Commission. Member States set national targets in these areas. They identify bottlenecks and set out ways to overcome these and achieve the targets.The National Reform Programme is assessed by the European Commission.

The social open method of coordination (OMC) was based on three pillars of social inclusion, pensions and health and long-term care. Member States set common objectives, agreed indicators to measure progress and prepared national strategies. The European Commission and Council assessed these strategies in a joint report. This social OMC contributed to learning on good practice but had a limited impact on policy and practice to combat poverty.The European Council (EPSCO) of June 2011 promised a stronger social OMC including greater stakeholder involvement at EU and national levels. Member States now, however, only prepare an annual national social report which is assessed by the Commission and should involve stakeholder participation.Europe 2020 includes a target of reducing the numbers living in poverty by 20m by 2020 .

The problems identified in stakeholder involvement at a European Union level included limitations in the short time allowed, the narrow focus and the range of stakeholders involved.

The European Commission requires stakeholders to be involved in the preparation of national plans and programmes in these policy areas. National, regional and local authorities as well as social partners and civil society are to be involved. This involvement has been found to be inadequate across the EU. A more deliberative process is required for a shared assessment of evidence and issues and a shared identification of strategies and policies.

Claiming our Future should campaign for: Regular, meaningful and structured ways

to involve stakeholders at

national and European levels in all stages of EU policy

processes.

Page 2: Claiming our Future

EUROPEAN DEMOCRACY

Develop a more active role for the Dail in EU policy making

European Council meetings are in effect held in secret, they are off record. National parliaments and the public are not informed about the actual position taken by their Government.

National Parliaments can only influence the EU system through the ratification process of EU Treaties.

There is a lack of transparency at EU level that threatens democracy at the national level.

There is an Oireachtas Committee on European Affairs since 2007 which can consider matters arising from Ireland’s membership of the EU.

There continues to be a lack of accountability to the Dail from Government Ministers and Civil Servants in relation to the positions they take on issues at an EU level.

Some Member States have developed significant national accountability from Governmental representatives. National parliaments have gained some control over Government Ministers as far as their actions at EU level are concerned.

The issue of transparency could be addressed by making Council meetings a matter of public record.

The Lisbon Treaty gave national parliaments some limited powers of policy intervention including a right to object in relation to a breach of the principle of subsidiarity, to a Treaty change proposed under the simplified revision procedure, or to a measure of judicial cooperation in civil law.

The provisions of the Lisbon Treaty do not allow for an adequate inclusion of national parliaments in EU policy making.

Claiming our Future should campaign for:Dail reform to secure accountability from Ministers for their

action at EU level and to enable a

contribution to shaping EU decision

making

Page 3: Claiming our Future

EUROPEAN DEMOCRACY

Rebalance power at EU level towards European Parliament

The European Parliament is the only directly elected institution at EU level.It has supervisory, budgetary and legislative powers.It exercises these powers through procedures of consultation, cooperation, co-decision and assent with the other institutions of the EU.

However, the procedures of co-decision and assent only apply to a limited percentage of the Treaty articles (25%). This reflects a democratic deficit at the heart of the EU

There are issues identified in the operation of and elections to the European Parliament including:

There are many cases where the European Parliament is obliged to make its decisions with an absolute or qualified majority. This can diminish the contest of ideas within the Parliament in the need to search for a broad consensus.

Elections to the European Parliament tend to be second order national competitions. Candidates compete on national issues and on the record of the national government of the day rather than on European issues and the direction of European policy and strategy.

European level strategy development and policy making has become dominated by the Council. This is where the Member State Governments meet through their leaders and Ministers. The Council has in turn been dominated by the larger Member States.

Since the Single European Act the European Parliament has been informed about future institutional changes through the Inter Governmental Conferences and enabled to express its opinion through its representation on the groups preparing Treaty changes. The European Parliament was sidelined in the development of the ‘Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union’ as this was not subject to the normal democratic scrutiny. It even expressed doubts as to the need for this Treaty.

Claiming our Future should campaign for:Institutional reform at

the EU level that empowers the

European Parliament and in particular

increases the matters for co-decision and

assent.

Page 4: Claiming our Future

NATIONAL DEMOCRACY - GREATER DIVERSITY IN POLITICS

Party Political Funding Criteria

Gender quotas, reducing state funding for political parties that fail to stand at least 30% of either gender, is progressing. More can be done to encourage political parties to facilitate a healthy and active democracy

As well as funding by the level of vote secured, the terms of funding for political parties could be altered to include numbers of members. This could help newer less established parties and would encourage higher membership levels.

We have one of the lowest percentage of the population as members of political parties. This stands at less than two percent of the population and in the bottom five of western European liberal democracies. The composition of our political representatives is very homogeneous in terms of gender, class, ethnicity and other forms of diversity.An Electoral Commission could review how state funding could incentivise political parties to make our democracy active and diverse.Parties could be encouraged to increase membership, diversify membership, and facilitate an active membership

Claiming our Future should campaign for:

State funding of political parties to be tied to their

contribution to the health of democracy. This

contribution would cover gender balance and

diversity in candidate selection and in

appointment of officers and committees, democracy

within the party, and securing a broad

membership.

Page 5: Claiming our Future

NATIONAL DEMOCRACY – ELECTORAL REFORM

Change the electoral system

The Proportional Representation Single Transferable Vote (PRSTV) Electoral System that we currently use is popular. However it has disadvantages.Multi seat constituencies promote intra party competition where competing politicians rely on local community service to differentiate themselves from competing party colleagues. This is thought to cause clientalism and brokerage, to detract from a more policy oriented political culture and to deter some people from standing for political office.

Electoral reform cannot cure all democracy’s ills but some believe changing the Irish PRSTV electoral system might help improve at least some aspects of Irish politics and political culture. There are various reform options: 1 A list proportional representation system where voters vote for a party who are then allocated parliamentary seats in proportion to their share of votes. They fill these seats from ‘party lists’. 2 First Past the Post – voters vote for one candidate and the candidate with the most votes wins.3 Mixed Member Proportional System where some seats are allocated in the list system and the remainder in local constituencies using the first past the post system

Some recent Irish debates have promoted the Mixed Member Proportional System which allows, for example, 50% of seats be allocated through national lists and 50% through politicians elected to represent local constituencies

The various options have different strengths and weaknesses. The list system enables parties to nominate who they want to the parliament. In theory this means they can reserve some seats for groups who would otherwise not get proportional or any representation (women, young people, ethnic minorities, people with disabilities). In some systems parties are obliged by legislation to achieve this outcome.

Claiming our Future should campaign for:

A change in the Irish electoral system to a system that can

generate a more diverse range of political representatives and a more effective and democratic

representative institution

Page 6: Claiming our Future

NATIONAL DEMOCRACY – SEANAD REFORM

Reform and empower the Seanad

Reform the Seanad so that its membership enables a participation of the diversity of Irish society. Empower the Seanad and enhance its role in shaping policy and holding government and the administration to account

The membership of the Seanad should be directly elected by the population. Reserved places should be used to secure a specific representation of emigrants and groups or interests insufficiently represented in the political composition of Dail Eireann.

Term limits would ensure ongoing diversity and significant input of fresh perspectives and new voices. This is essential to avoiding group think and to building a more critical political culture.

We need more democracy not less of it. The Irish Seanad did not cause the crisis and abolishing it will not improve Irish governance

The role of the Seanad should be reformed to be more effective in enabling accountable governance. A specific role should be to monitor poverty and equality proofing of all policy, report on compliance with environmental sustainability and ensure consultation in the legislative process

Claiming our Future should campaign for:

A reformed and empowered Seanad

giving representation to the diversity of

Irish society.

Page 7: Claiming our Future

NATIONAL DEMOCRACY – MAKING PARLIAMENT EFFECTIVE

Reform and strengthen the Dail

Ireland has one of the least effective and weakest parliaments in Europe.

Politicians are controlled by the political parties. Party whips (rules) oblige politicians to vote along party lines. This needs to be changed for a more effective parliament.

The Dail is weakened by the inability of the parliament committee to do effective investigative and policy work. Rules need to be changed to allow Oireachtas Committees to effectively initiate legislation. Oireachtas committees should be empowered to compel witnesses to appear before them and to hold state agencies to account. The Oireachtas Committees also need more research and policy resources.

These changes would make a more effective Dail and they would valuably change the culture of Irish politics

The Dail needs to be less controlled by the government.The government presently decide the timetable and agenda of the Dail.The Dail should now be empowered to define its own agenda and timetable.

Claiming our Future should campaign for:

A stronger parliament through:

•Changes to the Irish party whip system•Parliament set own agenda/time table•More powerful Oireacthas committees

Page 8: Claiming our Future

NATIONAL DEMOCRACY - COLLECTIVE DECISION-MAKING

Use consensus voting for contentious decisions

People sometimes try for a consensus: they talk and talk, there’s give-and-take, until all agree to a final document. This can happen in international conferences for example. Or they do the opposite: they talk and talk, there’s no give or take, until a majority vote. This can happen in parliaments, councils, and organisations.

In consensus voting, all relevant suggestions are debated, while a team of neutral mediators, the ‘consensors’, maintain a (short) list of four to six options. If there is no verbal consensus – if say four options remain under discussion – they use a consensus vote. This is a preferential points system: a 1 is given for a 1st preference, a 2 for a 2nd preference, etc. If someone casts all four preferences, the 1st gets 4 points, the 2nd gets 3, etc. If another person casts only two preferences, the 1st gets 2 points and the 2nd gets 1 point. The result is the option with the most points, the highest average preference.… and an average involves everybody (not just a majority).

Consensus voting, the Modified Borda Count (MBC), is the catalyst of consensus. Consensus voting is inclusive.

If my option is to win I need a range of high, middle and low preferences. I must persuade people who might disagree with me to give my option a preference. That’s dialogue. People are incentivised to cast a full ballot and therefore to state their compromise option(s). That’s mutual respect. If everyone casts their 2nd and subsequent preferences, we can identify their collective compromise

Claiming our Future should campaign for:

Consensus voting to be used on all contentious issues in the Dail and in

other democratic institutions

Page 9: Claiming our Future

LOCAL DEMOCRACY – STRENGTHEN LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Devolve powers and develop local funding

Irish local government has 501 functions but they are often only administering schemes on behalf of national government departments. In other countries policy areas like health education and policing come under the remit of local government and local services.

Ireland is one of the only countries that does not have local taxation sources to fund local government. More local revenue through local taxation, like site value taxes, would mean local government would have more capacity and control to make its own decisions and amend services to better meet local needs.

Poorer local government areas who cannot raise sufficient revenue can be equalised by funding transfers.

Local taxation would make local citizens and residents more demanding on local government about how local taxes are spent. A more engaged and energetic local democracy would result.

We need to devolve a broader range of powers and functions to local government. This would means key services can be better adapted to local needs and integrated into local delivery systems.

Claiming our Future should campaign for:Greater powers to be devolved and local funding streams be created for a more developed and stronger local government.

Page 10: Claiming our Future

Local Government – Participatory Democracy

Citizen Engagement

While Ireland has had over 20 years of experimentation with local partnership and local governancethere is still a significant participation gap for many people, in particular those who experience inequality & poverty. Participative processes too often lack quality & impact and have no formal status.

There are many examples world wide of participatory structures and processes we could learn from. The Brazilian Participatory Budgeting Process is well known and offers a means of participation in an area that is completely under-developed in Ireland.We could give civil society representatives a formal role in committees responsible for each public service sector (e.g. health, justice, education, transport, housing, planning, sport, culture, economic development).

Participatory processes must be developed at local level and are best measured by impact if they are to engage people. They must be seen to be a real source of influence for residents and citizens.

Local government could be required to develop participation strategies in conjunction with civil society aimed at enabling all who wish to participate to do so. Such strategies should address the often hidden barriers to participation such as gender inequality and care, literacy, physical accessibility and participation costs.

Claiming our Future should campaign for: direct civil society involvement in the decision making processes of local government and the use of participatory methods to maximise the input of people affected by decisions including those experiencing inequality and poverty.

Page 11: Claiming our Future

LOCAL GOVERNMENT – ELECTED MAYORS

Direct elections for Mayors at local level

Ireland has yet to develop legislation to enable people directly elect their own mayors.

This would only be meaningful in the context of wider local government reform so the elected mayor would have meaningful power

Irish local government has very little power of its own. Central government makes policy decisions and local government implements the decisions.

Areas like policing, education, health and transport could be the direct devolved function of local government. Currently national institutions have a regional or local presence to plan and deliver these services. This leads to fragmentation and incoherence.

A directly elected mayor could drive the local resilience that needs to be built in the face of economic and environmental shocks.

Directly elected mayors with adequate powers could drive this integration of local services. They could work to champion the investment needs of the local area. They could be guardians of the values of equality, environmental sustainability and participation in the local government system.

 Claiming our Future should campaign for:

Directly elected lord mayors with sufficient powers to coordinate public services at a local level.

Page 12: Claiming our Future

DEMOCRACY AND ORGANISATIONS

Foster and Fund Advocacy by Civil Society Organisations

Civil society organisations play important roles in the democratic life of society.They provide a space where individual concerns can be shared and developed as collective interests.

They offer a means of articulating, promoting, and negotiating for these collective interests.This enhances democracy where the needs of groups experiencing inequality and disadvantage are brought forward.

Many civil society organisations promoting the interests of group that experience inequality and disadvantage depend on statutory funding. These funding programmes have been disproportionately reduced with a consequent weakening and diminishment of the contribution of these organisations to the democratic life of society.

There are few independent funding sources available to civil society in a context where philanthropy is under-developed and independent trust funds virtually non-existent.

Civil society organisations were engaged in a limited non-adversarial problem solving partnership with the state. These structures have now been dismantled. More effective channels to bring advocacy to bear on the policy process are required.

Claiming our Future should campaign for:

A Constitutional amendment to recognise the

contribution of civil society organisations to democracy and to protect their right to

advocacy work

There is an administrative hostility to advocacy by civil society organisations.Service level agreements with the state include provisions that preclude advocacy.The funding of organisations that engage in advocacy can be threatened.A culture of fear around funding serves to discourage organisations from engaging in advocacy.There is a political unresponsiveness to advocacy by civil society organisations.This diminishes our democracy.

Page 13: Claiming our Future

DEMOCRACY AND ORGANISATIONS

Trade Union Right of Recognition

Irish labour legislation allows people to join trade unions.

However, it does not give them the right to be represented by their trade unions nor to have their trade unions negotiate collectively on their behalf.

Rulings of the Irish Supreme Court have concluded that the Constitutional right to association also implies the right to disassociation. This gives the employer the right to refuse to engage with the trade union representatives of a workforce.

However, case law of the European Court of Human Rights has accepted that the right to join a trade union includes the right to bargain collectively and the right to strike. This case law also precludes victimisation of trade unionists.

The Charter of Fundamental Rights (Article 28) sets out that workers and employers or their respective organisations have the right to negotiate and conclude collective agreements. The Charter forms part of the European Treaties.

Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rigths specifies trade union membership as an important political right essential to democracy.

The right to organise and to bargain collectively with employers is enshrined under membership (Parts I and II) of the International Labour Organisation. Ireland has ratified the Core Conventions No 87 concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise (1948 ) and No 98 concerning the Application of the Principles of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention 1949.

Claiming our Future should campaign for:

A clear and unequivocal right in

legislation for all workers to collective

bargaining within workplaces through their trade unions

Page 14: Claiming our Future

DEMOCRACY AND ORGANISATIONS

Develop User Participation and Advocacy Services

People in institutional settings do not have an adequate say in relation to decisions that impact on them. This can range from older people and people with disabilities in care settings, people in prison and children in educational establishments.Structures for participation by people in the decision making of such institutions need to be further developed. Where necessary independent advocacy services need to be further extended.

User participation in institutional settings such as long term care institutions, prisons and schools is under-developed and inadequately empowered.

Structures for user participation should enable people to become actively and genuinely involved in defining the issues of concern to them, in making decisions about factors that affect them, in devising and implementing policy, and in the planning, development and delivery of the services.

The Office of the Ombudsman should have a clearly defined role in establishing standards for user participation and advocacy supports for people in institutional settings such as long term care providers, prisons, and educational establishments.

Advocacy is not recognised as a right. It is not enshrined as such in Irish legislation. There has been a failure to provide adequate funding for advocacy.Advocacy seeks to safeguard the rights of vulnerable people and to empower those people. It takes a number of forms including self advocacy (by oneself), citizen advocacy (by another person voluntary), peer advocacy (by another member of the group), collective advocacy (self advocates unite), family advocacy (by a family member) and professional advocacy (by an expert).

Claiming our Future should campaign for:

Statutory requirements to

ensure that people in institutional settings

have access to structures and

supports that enable their participation in

decision making