EU INCLUSION STRATEGIES GROUP
8 - 10October 2015, Brussels

Minutes

Attendance: Elke Vandermeerschen (EAPN BE), Douhomir Minev (EAPN BG), Suzana Jedvaj (EAPN HR), Milena Černá (EAPN CZ), Marina Koukou (EAPN CY), Per K. Larsen (EAPN DK), Marjatta Kaurala (EAPN FI), Jeanne Dietrich (EAPN FR), Wolfgang Krebs (EAPN DE), Johanna László (EAPN HU), Thorbera Fjölnisdóttir (EAPN IC), Paul Ginnell (EAPN IE), Nicoletta Teodosi (EAPN IT), Norberts Snarskis (EAPN LV), Robert Urbé (EAPN LU), Vincent Magri (EAPN MT), Sonja Leemkuil (EAPN NL), Dag Westerheim (EAPN NO), Ryszard Szarfenberg (EAPN PL), Paula Cruz (EAPN PT), Iris Alexe (EAPN RO), Marija Babović (EAPN SR), Slavomíra Mareková (EAPN SK), Graciela Malgesini (EAPN ES), Gunvi Haggren (EAPN SE), Katherine Duffy (EAPN UK), Stephan Burger (Eurodiaconia).

EAPN Staff: Sian Jones, Amana Ferro, Mihael Topolovec, Rebecca Lee.

Apologies:Eugen Bierling-Wagner (EAPN AT),Kiira Gornischeff (EAPN EE), Maria Marinakou (EAPN GR), Jekaterina Navickė (EAPN LT),Mila Carovska (EAPN MK),

No answer: Marco Aliotta (Caritas Europa), Maciej Kucharczyk (AGE Platform), Agata D’Addato (Eurochild).

  1. Introduction

The meeting debuted with a tour de table, which incorporated a ‘getting to know each other’ activity. (See the attached sheet)

Mihael/ Secretariatpresented the idea behind the Contact Book – for the Secretariat to have a better overview of people's background, skills and competences, but also for EU ISG members to get to know each other better and to more easily exchange and cooperate.

Sian/Secretariat presented the idea of buddies, who are experienced members who offer to provide personalized support for new members. Anybody can contact these people below by e-mail or during the meetings.

Members willing to be buddies for new members: Katherine, Elke, Paul, Jeanne (during meetings only), Norbert, Marina (buddy for Suzana already), Graciela.

Feedback from buddies

Katherine / UK – I've been around for a long time, working with the Council of Europe also. I am a former Chair of EAPN's Social Inclusion Working Group. Contact email: Katherine Duffy:

Marina / Cyprus– It's difficult in the beginning, especially when English not mother tongue, so happy to help. Contact e-mail:Marina Koukou ()

Graciela / Spain – The next months are hard, so I won't be able to react very quickly. If simple and short requests are made, it's fine.Contact e-mail: Graciela Malgesini ()

Elke / Belgium – I was a buddy of Johanna, but she is fine already. I started to work with young migrants and this influenced my work up until now - I got to know the Flemish anti-poverty work, then joined BAPN as a policy officer & EAPN's previous Employment Working Group.Contact e-mail:

Norberts / Latvia – I am a medical doctor, paediatrician by training, now in psychiatrics and working with people with mental disabilities. Since '91,Ii have developed care services. I have experience in working with different levels of Government. Contact e-mail:

Jeanne / France – I would like to thank Robert, Katherine, Graciela, Per who helped me integrate into the group, so it is my turn now – but only at the meetings please. In France they have a 5-year integrated plan against poverty now, so I can give some hints.Contact e-mail:

Paul / IE - Mywork is a lot about following EU policies, seeing the maze. I can help with that and even if I've been around a long time, we always learn together; it's why we follow these frustrating processes. Contact e-mail:

Sian / Secretariatpresented the origins of the group: the EUISG came out of the last reorganisation in 2012, when the threeprevious Working Groups (on Social Inclusion, Employment, and Structural Funds) were replaced. The Group is tasked with delivering on the policy objective(s) of the Strategic Plan. It is difficult work, as it's very tied to the work programme that EAPN is funded for, but the EUISGdecided together that to continue to follow the EU process and to have an impact. EAPN still believes in a common project and advocacy strategy, where members can exchange and try and influence policies together. Members of the EUISG are expected to come to the 3 meetings a year, and there is only one representative per network now. If the representative can't make the meeting they need to find a substitute and are responsible for distributing the information. The task is to contribute to the policies – review, exchange, help, make common messages for advocacy. Members need to connect up to theirEXCOmember and with other members oftheir network and build their position together at national level, and agree their approach to the EU level.

Chairs’ views on advantages to membership

Graciela / ES – We have a group called Europe in the Spanish NN, made up of members of all EAPN groups. They form a shared view of what's happening and what are the priorities. Information from the EU ISG makes them experts in EU affairs, sometimes the Government knew about a Directive after them. Therefore, the Government decides to implement with them and they can position themselves strongly. E.g., they went to rural areas to talk about health cuts and they explained the fiscal compact and Memorandum of Understanding and the EU Semester first, and then the cuts. People didn't know that cuts are due to EU macroeconomic policies. We are in a general election period now and this knowledge is important. To get this knowledge though you need to put in the effort – ie, do the boring questionnaires, but its very powerful to have the EU view.

Paul / IE – The process isdifficult to follow, but at the end of the day we try to get better policies – and the EU level provides an argument at national level. Conversely, national experiences can be used at EU level.

Sonja / NL–I feel more could be done in NL. Lots of work is done locally, and trying to coordinate information can be difficult. The processes take a long time.

Feedback from discussion in pairs, members’ role in the EU ISG

Stephan / Eurodiaconia (with Nordic members) –Wediscussed alternatives to existing Task Forces, and came up with 2 ideas: a yearly thematic focus, producing a joint paper or project proposals, or 3-4 working groups, as previous subgroups within this Group.

Marina / CY(with Suzana-HR) –We would need shorter document with key figures that could be updated. Graciela showed us a 3-pager on poverty indicators, presented in a good way. Another idea could be that once a year, eg 17 Octobr, we campaign on these figures at national level and track progress, or lack of. Graciela has another template with headline targets and what's achieved and what's the EU average, she will send it round.

Iris / RO (with Robert-LU, Katherine-UK) –Our group asked itself if/how the EU ISG will work to be effective. It would be useful if there is a possibility to make project applications uniting more NNs. It is important to continue the Semester work, but we need space to discuss certain issues and be reactive. To talk about the existing poor people and not only new people. If there's nothing about refugees in NRPs, how do we make a common view?We need to be ready, andwe need to be visible through videos, blogs, photos.

Paula / PT(with Nicoletta-IT)–We have agreed that EU ISG has an important role – is part of something bigger than EAPN and contribute for the work that EAPN does at European level. For that we must be stronger and do our work (even if we think that are boring documents). For us – EAPN Portugal – our role in EU ISG is quite important because it gives us a difference when comparing to other organisations at national level

Jeanne / FR (with Mihael, Johanna-HU) – We discussed a possible Task Force on access to food. The decision is for Jeanne to send it and include it in the TF discussion on Saturday. They also thought about how to make work more visible. There was a good example of regional cooperation in Hungary which could be replicated in the group.

Milena / CZ - Katarina is successful in Brno, with Roma inclusion projects. 2 years ago, she created a group for social living with many national NGOs, tasked with accepting rules on social living as a human right. She wrote a book on 2014-2020 for politicians who are not clear on social inclusion. This could be very useful to share.

ACTION POINTS

  • Members are encouraged to send Contact Book information and a photograph to the Scretariat by the end of November ().
  • Members are encouraged to get in touch with their buddies either directly using the e-mails supplied, or via the Secretariat ()
  1. EU ISG Work Programme 2015 and 2016 – Latest Developments

Sian / Secretariatpresented the Work Programme for 2015 (available on the Members’ Room and updated regularly as the work is completed with links to all our work). She flagged up that there will be no Annual Convention this year, but is likely to be in February next year. She also highlighted some of our achievements, e.g. letter from Commissioner Thyssen highlighting the importance the Commission give to our assessments and messages, particularly on the CSRs and NRPs. Our messages around Active Inclusion, social standards, importance of social objectives etc have been picked up in the changing priorities of the Commission under Thyssen, ie in the Commissioner's dialogues and initial statements around 'social floor/social agenda'The Secretariat continues its involvement in the Semester Alliance, though there is no funding this year. They have developed responses to the CSRs, and letters to Juncker on the Annual Growth Survey.. The national alliances in DK/IE/BG continue too.

Clarifications to questions from Sian/Secretariat

-Did we apply for Commission funding again? Yes, in August.

-Are there 15 or 5 awareness-raising projects on europe 2020? Originally 15 were planned, but as there was a problem with the deficit, the Bureau reduced this to 5. Why does the Commission cut funding if we do so much good? The Commission is withdrawing from core-funded networks, and they fund more on a project-base, to do specific actions – this is a general change, but also a bit about us being seen as a critical voice. Stephan from Eurodiaconia confirmed they have been told to not apply for more, so it's general trend.

-Have you told them what the monetary value equivalent is of our work ie consultancy? Could be more expensive for them.

-They like to be seen to be having civil dialogue, as they know the EU is in a crisis.

Sian / Secretariat presented the EAPN Work Programme for 2016, submitted to the Commission in August.

- The original draft agreed in the General Assembly was adapted, in the light of budget restrictions.

-Main proposed changes were outlined:

-We have less staff resources, particularly in the policy team with Sian and Amana having only 4 days covered by the core budget. Sian will work an extra day covered by project work.The EU ISG would have 2 meetings of 2 and half days, combined with EXCO/GA, instead of 3 – these are likely to be in March and Sept/Oct.

-Two task forces of 2 meetings only are proposed instead of 3.

-Our main content work will continue to be on Europe 2020/Semester, although there will be some changes, to the timings and deliverables in the light of the changes in the Semester.

-We should have the Mid-Term Review of Europe 2020 next year now. Also, a Mid-Term Review on of the multiannual financial framework.

-Work on social standards/social floor, access to services, follow up on Structural Funds and the 20% of ESF on poverty, and on the European Employment Strategy are all included.

-The Secretariat will prepare a simple Work Programme for the EUISG once the final one is adopted by the Exco with a new budget.

Comment

The infomation is getting concentrated in fewer policy officers who will be working less, and with only 2 meetings, it will be hard to build common views.

Sian / Secretariat presented the current state of play regarding the restructuring/ strategic plan in EAPN

-Different proposals for re-shaping the governance and structures of EAPN have been shared, and a new common proposal has now been proposed by the Bureau to be discussedthe EXCO. The main change proposed is to merge the EUISG and EXCO, focussed on strategic policy plus membership development, in one group, with a bigger Bureau to do the day-to-day management. Another proposal is to have longer, on-going working groups, instead of Task Forces,but the budget for this is not still clear.This is just the start of discussions, and decisions will be made over a year up to the next GA, and would be in place then for 2017.

-The discussions on the structure are for 2017, but 2016 is still to be decided, as the Work Programme submitted to the Commission will need to be adapted in the light of decisions by the EXCO on the budget andregarding different proposals linked to restructuring.

Discussion

-The group discussed initial reactions to the changes, and agreed on the need to discuss further with their EXCO members and their networks/organizations. They also discussed the preparation for the joint session. There was some concern expressed about the lack of input by the EUISG and the Steering Group in the planning of the joint session.

ACTION POINTS

  • The Secretariat will prepare with the Steering Group of the EUISGthe 2016 Work Programme, once the final WP has been agreed by the EXCO.
  • Members should discuss the re-structuring proposal circulated by the Bureau with their EXCO members and their networks/organizations to provide a joint input.
  1. Election of the Steering Group

There were 4 candidates for the EU ISG Steering Group proposed. The European Organizations did not present any candidates. They are:

-Paul Ginnell, EAPN IE

-Graciela Malgesini, EAPN ES

-Elke Vandermeerschen, EAPN BE

-Marija Babović, EAPN SE

Graciela / ES – I would like it minuted that my decision to be proposed was a decision taken by the Spanish Exco. See item 10. for the result.

  1. Minutes, Matters Arising, and reminder of the Programme

Sian / Secretariatprovided an update on the Action Points and matters arising since the last meeting in Bilbao, at the beginning of July.

  • Minutes and agenda were adopted.

Robert / LU - On page 2 of the Minutes, regarding the 5 Presidents’ Report,Euro Summit is written, but it should be Eurogroup.

Graciela/ ES – EAPN EShasproduced a template on how to prepare a Social Situation Report, focused on the comparison between the headline targets of the Europe 2020 and achievements in our country.

Sian / Secretariat–In 2014, the EUISG developed a template for social situation reports (Vito/IT, Jeanne/FR and Elke/BE) but few members used it. Atthe last meeting the EUISG decided it did not want a common template for Social Situation Reports as some didn’t think they were useful, also each country has a different culture, and the reports needed to be adapted to the specific national audience (ie some do poverty watch or briefings, other’s a newspaper, others a more formal social situation report…), however it was very important to learn from each other.

  1. Evaluation of policy conference and exchange with the EXCO

Evaluation of the Policy Conference 2015

Positive aspects

-In general, members felt that the conference was well organized and attended. It targeted the right people, giving a good profile to EAPN, its work and key messages.

-The quality of the speakers was generally high, particularly EAPN speakers, the representative with direct experience of poverty and Tanya Cox.

-It was important to have achieved a lot of important representatives from the Commission (including DG ECFIN), although it was disturbing that their tone was so calm and cold.

-It was also useful to have the presence of the European Semester Officers, particularly validating the work from the EAPN Ireland and the Semester Alliance.

-The participation of Commissioner Thyssen was crucial, even though it was a formal speech with no questions. The Secretariat havewritten a follow-up to her, and the Bureau will continue to pursue a face-to-face meeting.Commissioner Thyssen’s speech was disappointing in certain points: creating friendly environment for businesses (which basically means destroying social protection); minimum income was not mentioned. However it also contained important messages such as that the employment is not enough for poverty eradication, that we need to create jobs. The secretariat have asked for her speech which will be reflected in the report.

-The presentation from the Chair of the Social Protection Committee was seen as very useful by some members particularly in confronting DG ECFIN, and embarrassing by others, because it highlighted their lack of information and power.

-It was important to get the latestinformation and discourse around the concept of the “Social Triple A”/social standards/floor, but it lacked content. EAPN has made proposals on this in their letter to Juncker, and will now wait to build on the People Experiencing Poverty meeting in November, which will focus specifically on this topic.

Points to improve

-The preparation of questions/key messages for the Conference by the EUISG was a missed opportunity, even though the draft key messages were circulated by e-mail as part of the letter to President Juncker;