Key planks of Kinnock’s reform strategy

Date: 20/01/2000

Matching policy priorities with resources

THE Commission should in future refuse to take on additional tasks outside its "core" areas of activity which the institution does not believe it can handle "within an acceptable margin of risk", according to the report.

It says the Commission has in the past failed to define its priorities rigorously enough or to match its plans for action with the resources needed to implement them. Indeed, decisions on Commission activities have generally been taken separately from decisions on how precious resources should be shared out.

"This led to a lack of concentration on core tasks and a failure adequately to translate political priorities into decisions on organisational structures and on the allocation of resources," states the report.

The paper argues that the answer to this problem lies in introducing a new budgeting process - known as activity-based management - which directly links objectives and activities to the financial and human resources available.

It says that under the new system, results will be "at the centre of the functioning of the Commission".

Kinnock is planning to introduce a new 'strategic planning and programming cycle' alongside the budgeting process under which directorates-general would first be invited to draw up proposals for policy priorities and objectives, planned activities and the resources needed to implement them by policy area. The Commission would then draw these together into a draft 'annual policy strategy' which would be discussed with the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament.

Once the priorities for the forthcoming year had been agreed on the basis of this report, the Commission would draw up its budget proposals, and would only adopt its work programme once these had been agreed.

The report also examines the use of outside firms to carry out work on the Commission's behalf. It rejects calls for a "generalised externalisation" of the institution's activities, insisting that the emphasis should instead be on "bringing dependability and order to what already occurs".

It also stresses that outside contractors should only be used when it is more efficient and effective to do so, and not to "administer ill-defined tasks".

Finally, the report underlines the need for more efficient, performance-orientated working methods. Some of the measures to achieve this have already been introduced, but more will be needed.

Introducing a service culture

THE report outlines four key principles which must underpin the Commission's work in future to ensure that it focuses on delivering the best possible services: accountability, responsibility, efficiency and transparency.

Accountability, says the paper, goes beyond simply ensuring that the Commission reports to the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament on its activities. "Exercising good stewardship of the resources available to the Commission involves ensuring they are used efficiently and effectively in all areas." it states.

Accountability, it adds, goes hand in hand with the exercise of reponsibility. The current system, with its "complex and extended chain of approvals" for the simplest of items, may have been introduced because of a desire for carefulness but "has evolved in a way that now diminishes and obscures responsibility". The report states that a clearer definition of tasks will reduce ambiguity about who is responsible for what.

When it comes to efficiency, states the report, the Commission has long been a powerful advocate of the need to obtain value for money, but has been "slower" in changing its own procedures to achieve just that. "Cost-effectiveness must have a premium," it insists.

Finally, the paper argues that transparency within the Commission's own administration is a "vital prerequisite" for the greater openness towards the outside world required by the EU treaty.

To put these principles into action, the report recommends a series of specific measures: the establishment of an Interinstitutional Committee on Standards in Public Life to supervise implementation of codes of conduct, the introduction of a code of "good administrative behaviour"; new rules to give the public greater access to EU documents; a code of conduct for relations with the European Parliament, further development of the Europa and Internet site; and measures to shorten the current delays before the Commission pays its bills.

Reforming staff policy from 'recruitment to retirement'

THE Commission's management, training, career development, staff assessment and social policies are outdated and must be reformed, warns the report.

"The aim of the current reform process is to sustain an independent, permanent and high-quality European civil service that equips the Commission to fulfil its tasks as a world-class organisation," it states." To achieve this, "a comprehensive overhaul of human resources policy from recruitment to retirement is required".

This means ensuring, among other things, that the Commission has the right staff to fulfil its tasks by modernising its recruitment, training and career development policies; ensuring that officials' rights and obligations are made clear; and making sure mobility is "expected, encouraged and regarded as a career asset".

The report states that the institution will in future give priority to candidates' management skills when selecting staff, introduce individual performance assessments for senior officials, make all those appointed to management positions undergo a probationary period and introduce the 'principle of reversibility' so that managers who do not reach the required standards can be demoted.

A systematic programme of training will be introduced and "satisfactory participation" in such courses will be a requirement for anyone who has management responsibility. The report also recommends that, in future, most new staff should only be recruited on a temporary basis and required to complete an 18-month training course before being offered a permanent job.

In addition, the paper proposes changes to the current system for grading staff which makes it difficult for officials to move from one category to another and "acts as an artificial constraint on the development of individuals who manifest particular talent and capability".

Finally, it states that the current disciplinary procedure for officials suspected of wrong-doing must be changed. To make the system more effective and less subject to delays, it recommends setting up an Inter-Institutional Disciplinary Board, creating an Attorney's Office in the Commission to take the administration's case to the board and providing staff with clear information setting out their obligations and possible sanctions for misconduct.

The paper also stresses the need to ensure that staff who have "serious reason to suspect that wrongdoing has, is or could take place" can report their concerns and be sure of a thorough investigation and effective response. What is required, it states, is "a workable system that is fair to 'whistle-blowers', to people accused of wrong-doing, and to the institution".

Delivering and sustaining reform

IMPLEMENTATION of many of the measures outlined in the report will begin immediately, but others will have to wait until the staff regulations have been changed.

The Commission intends to appoint a second deputy secretary-general tasked with making the institution's working methods more efficient, and four planning and coordination groups will be set up to help departments and the Reform Task Force draw up key proposals. An external advisory board made up of leaders from industry and public administration will also be established.

However, the Commission stresses that it cannot achieve the goal of comprehensive reform on its own, and insists that parallel changes are required in the Council of Ministers and European Parliament.

Ensuring effective financial control

THE Commission's existing financial management and control systems can no longer cope with the enormous increase in the amounts of money and the range of projects for which the institution is responsibile.

"Procedures, consequently, need to be simpler, faster and more transparent and decentralised," states the report, which adds that to create a real sense of responsibility, officials' tasks must be clearly defined, steps must be taken to ensure everyone knows what their responsibilities are, quality control must be built into the management process, and fair and trusted rules for dealing with breaches of the rules must be introduced. Wherever possible, adds the paper, "the person who takes the operational decision to go ahead with an action involving expenditure should be the person who authorises the expenditure".

The report also recommends ending the current system under which the Commission's financial controller is responsible both for vetting planned projects and for evaluating the results once they have been completed. It calls instead for individual directorates-general to be given responsibility for monitoring spending and for the financial control department to be disbanded.

A Central Finance Service would be created to advise departments on the rules governing spending and the new Internal Audit Service would monitor the effectiveness of internal controls, as well as performance in general. An Audit Progress Broad would also be set up to ensure that any recommendations for changes in procedure made by the audit service were implemented.