Funding the fight against poverty: time to act on the
next Round of Structural Funds’
EAPN-Ireland, Structural Funds 2007-2013 Seminar
Collins Barracks 19th May 2005
Present: Joe Gallagher (Community Workshop in Horticulture), Margaret Deaton (Tallaght
Centre for the Unemployed), Isabelle Williams (ATD 4th World), Patrick Burke (Threshold),
Paul Quinn (Consultant), Ide Lenihan (Drogheda Community Forum), Philip O’Connor (Dublin
Employment Pact), Peter Hermann (European Social Organisation and Science Consultancy),
Declan Jones (Focus Ireland) Jennifer Flynn (South inner City Community Development
Association), Mary Mc Grath (Education Disadvantaged), Eileen Dillard (Lucan Disability
Action Group), Martin O’Connor (COPE), Andy Bourne (Galway Simon Community), Kay Lynch
(Northside Community Law Centre), Celine Grocq (Tallaght Partnership), Anne Coffey
(Presentation Centre), Barbara Walshe (Combat Poverty Agency), Francis Byrne (One Parent
Exchange and Network), Sean Regan (Community Workers Co-operative), and Brian Harvey
(consultant)
Chair: Francis Byrne (Director of OPEN and Board Member of EAPN)
Francis Byrne opened the seminar by welcoming the participants and highlighting that at
European level the regulations for the next round of Structural Funds were being agreed and
that it was important for those involved in anti-poverty and social exclusion work to
understand and influence Structural Funds from 2007-2013.
First Presentation:
Brian Harvey, ‘Next round of the structural funds – the issues for Ireland and the European background’
(Brian is an expert on the Structural Funds and has been tracking developments at a European level.)
1. Broader context
• Next round is 4th reformed round, following 1988-93, 1994-9, 2000-6
• Ireland was and still is a substantial beneficiary
• Kickstarted celtic tiger (?).
• High rate of draw-down (absorption) in Ireland.
• Significant investment in Human Resources 1994-9.
• Social inclusion a priority 2000-6.
• Access to NGOs 1989+, social NGOs 1994+ in monitoring committees
• Current NDP includes non-Structural Fund elements.
2. Criticisms of the structural funds in Ireland
• Top down consultation, management model.
• Inequality seen as regional & spatial, not social.
• Social inclusion not mainstreamed across all measures. Some measures exclusive.
• Bias toward ‘hard’ measures, private vs public (e.g. roads).
• True additionality?
• Monitoring process unreformed (see: ESRI).
• We do not know if they promote inclusion (see: CPA pilot programme on indicators).
• Evaluations economistic in nature.
• NGO involvement weak compared to other European countries (UK, ECE).
3. Structural funds debate in Ireland
• Govt: ‘Maximising our draw down’.
• The regional boundaries (S&E, BMW).
• How much for Ireland 2007-2013?
• Ireland has gone from 68% to 133% of EU average.
• Parliament predicts Irish share of SF down from €3.974m to €928m (-79%)
• Little debate on what they should be used for.
4. How next structural funds will be different
• Simplification into three objectives: convergence, competition, cooperation
• Shift of resources eastward
• No Community Initiative Programmes. INTERREG, URBAN, LEADER mainstreamed, not
EQUAL
• Less Commission supervision, oversight
• Community Strategic Guidelines (CSGs): new
• National Reference Documents (NRDs): new
• Partnership principle: NGOs, civil society (Article 10)
5. 2007-2013 Round: timelines
• Announced in 3rd cohesion report (Feb. 2004)
• Linked to financial perspective (FP) 2007-2013 (Jan 2004)
• Regulations published July 2004:
- General regulation (long)
- Specific regulations for ERDF, ESF, Cross Border Co-operation, Cohesion Fund
• Community Strategic Guidelines (CSG)
- Informal working document March 2005
- Non-paper May 2005
- Due to be considered by regional affairs ministers 20th May 2005
• Financial Perspective to be adopted by Council June 2005
• Regulations adopted by Parliament July 2005
• CSG adopted by Commission in 3 months
• Voted in Parliament September
• Approved by Council October
• National processes conclude 2005-6
• Commence 1.I.2007 (incl. Romania, Bulgaria)
6. The Regulations
• Positive features
- Article 10, recognizing NGOs, civil society in preparation, implementation, monitoring,
evaluation
- Provision for global grants, technical assistance for partners
- Broader role for evaluation, publicity
- Commitments to social inclusion; wider assistance in ESF
- ERDF for community development
- Social inclusion in cooperation objective
• Problem area: EQUAL is not included
7. Community Strategic Guidelines
• Situated in growth and jobs context
• Social inclusion, Open Method of Coordination not a major context
• ‘Smart administration’, ‘governance’ idea, but must be extended to NGOs.
• Eleven themes. Social inclusion evident in transport, entrepreneurship, cities, #112-113
ESF-related on social protection systems.
• EQUAL issue at last recognized
• Overall, needs rebalancing
8. European battlegrounds• The size of the structural funds (financial perspective debate)
• Level of Commission supervision
• Partnership principle, article 10
• Note the broader context of Lisbon, growth and jobs strategies
• Contribution by EAPN, EDF to improve, tighten regulations, CSGs.
9. Issues for Ireland
• Nature of the consultation process
• Is social inclusion a prominent objective?
• What is the proportion? Links to NAPS policies?
• Is it mainstreamed across all axes?
• Partnership: involving NGOs in planning, design, monitoring, delivery, evaluation.
• With EQUAL gone, what points of access for NGOs?
•
•
•
•
Civil society in cooperation objective? (#19 GFA).
Are monitoring processes reformed? Improved indicators?
Are the CSGs observed?
European oversight?
10. Consultation process
• National Strategic reference Guidelines (SRG) well advanced in other countries, not here
• Good models of consultation:
• Lay down model, plan, timetable in advance
• Give an adequate time frame Involve NGOs in full cycle of consultation, start to finish
• Involve NGOs on thematic working groups, give them Technical Assistance
• Make draft docs available at all stages
• Use multiple means of consultation, national to local, internet
• Give an account of the process afterwards, showing how issues raised were addressed
11. Why a NGO role is important
• A broader process is a better process
• Elevated, appropriate importance for social objectives, considerations
• Reaching those most in need, marginalized
• Essential for meaningful partnership
• Prevent domination by ‘hard’ projects
• Transparency and effectiveness
12. Final comments
Once you change who makes the policy, you change the policy.
The structural funds were never about the money: they were always about using the funds as
an instrument for social change.
Second Presentation:
Paul Ginnell, Policy and Support Worker with EAPN, Ireland.
The aim of this presentation is to very briefly highlight the main issues which EAPN has been
lobbying on in relation to the Regulations and Community Strategic Guidelines for the
Structural Funds 2007-2013.
Key Policy Issues
Structural Funds Budget / Financial Perspective• Supporting a higher budget – The higher the budget allocated for
Structural Funds the higher the allocation for social inclusion is likely to be.
Regulations and Community Strategic Guidelines
• Prioritising Social Inclusion - ‘Growth and Jobs’ is currently the main focus particularly
in the CSG and its overall context for Structural Funds. Social Inclusion must be of equal
priority to Employment and environmental priorities.
• Mainstreaming Broad Social Inclusion - Social Inclusion must be a priority across all
the funds and not just limited the European Social Fund.
• Partnership - It is important to protect the view of ‘partnership’ in the regulations which
includes NGO’s and organisations working on equality between women and men. Anti-poverty
and social inclusion organisations should have a central role to play at all stages of the
Structural Funds from planning through implementation and monitoring to final evaluation.
• EQUAL - This Community Initiative is not mainstreamed in the programme but it is
important that the regulations and guidelines state clearly how the principles of EQUAL are to
be mainstreamed as is stated in the CSG.
• Monitoring - The European Commission is to have less of a role in monitoring than the
current round. It is important that the Commission does maintain a strong monitoring role.
• Indicators - The CSG and Regulations need to emphasise the need for clear indicators to
show how the Funds are tackling issues of social inclusion and poverty
• A greater implementation role for Anti-Poverty organisations – Through Global
Grants and Technical Assistance Funding anti-poverty and social inclusion organisations
should have greater access to the funds and in managing their implementation.
• Good Governance – The initial issue on ‘smart administration has been changed to ‘good
governance which gives it a more strategic focus however it must be expanded beyond public
administration and public service to include increasing the capacity of NGOs including their
capacity to engage with Structural Funds otherwise it increases levels of inequality in terms
of capacity.
EAPN Campaign at European Level
• Preparation of Position Papers and briefing documents (Available on EAPN Europe web-site
http://www.eapn.org/code/en/publ.asp?section=x5x. These documents cover the:
o Financial Perspective,
o Regulations and
o Draft Community Strategic Guidelines.
• Meeting Officials at EU level – including officials in the Commission and the Parliament
• Lobbying at Member State Level
o National Managing Authorities for the Structural Funds (Department of Finance Ireland)
o Member States Permanents Representative to EU
• Longer term campaign on national planning is next - National Strategic Reference
Guidelines will be agreed at national level once the regulations and CSG are finalised in the
next couple of months.
• Updated information is available on EAPN Ireland web-site www.eapn.ie
Open Forum Discussion
The discussion that followed highlighted a number of issues of priority for participants and
suggestions for a strategy for progressing these issues. Clarificartion was also sought from a
panel.
Panel consisted of:
• Brian Harvey
• Paul Ginnell
• Sean Regan
Some of the Key issues included:
1. Consultation(s) on next round and how inclusive these might be.
2. Issue of uncertainty re post-07 funding of the Equal Opportunities Childcare Programme,
Peace Programme etc.
3. Next round of Structural Fund projects are likely to need to have 50% matching-funding,
which will be a huge issue for organisations which have no core-funding.
4. Education system itself reinforcing education inequalities and needs to be addressed.
Strategies:
1. Be pro-active about consultation
— Involve/invite senior key person in Dept of Finance and be pro-active in consultation with
them.
— Create spaces for NGOs to dialogue with civil servants/policy makers.
— Organise consultation fora for community sector with CWC.
— Draw up an alternative plan for next round, like has been done in the Czech Republic.
2. Lobbying
— Use international instruments which Ireland has signed up to (IHRN can help with this).
— Use Oireachtas Committee system to lobby T.D.s etc e.g. European Affairs.
— Use Forum on Europe to raise issues in next rounds (query: is Forum ending at referendum
on EU constitution?).
— Make formal complaint to Molesworth St. and/or European Ombudsman re lack/quality of
consultation.
3. EAPN Ireland should establish an expert group like the one which currently
exists for Employment.
4. Work with other EAPNs on trans-national themes, e.g.: minimum standards.