1.1. Welcome by M. Glaude: Eurostat Director

/ EUROPEAN COMMISSION
EUROSTAT
Directorate F: Social Statistics and Information Society /
Doc. Eurostat/F/06/DSS/10/14/EN
Draft Minutes
meeting of the european directors of social statistics
luxembourg, 18-19 september 2006
bechbuilding, room “Quetelet”

Draft minutes

1. Introduction

1.1. Welcome by M. Glaude: Eurostat Director

In its introductory words, M. Glaude recalled the last modification in Eurostat's organigramme, in particular the unfortunate demise of M. Hanreich, the Director-General, at the beginning of the year, hisreplacement by M. Herve Carré, former deputy Director General in DG ECFIN and the arrival of the missing director of business statistics, M. Peter Bekx. The senior management team is nowadays complete. Another important event is the elaboration, together with the policy DGs and the MS of the new 5 year statistical programme.

1.2. Adoption of the agenda

The agenda was adopted

1.3 Adoption of the minutes of the meeting on 28-29September2005

The minutes were adopted

2. Report on the work done by the SDG

M. Glaude introduced the item on the basis of the prepared document (Doc.Eurostat/F/06/DSS/10/2/EN). Two meetings of the SDG took place so far, one concentrating on some strategic issues, and leading to the creation by the DSS of two TF (core social variables and new household flexible approach), and the other collecting views of users of the Commission and producers in the members states on the future 5 year statistical programme. M. Glaude noted that at this stage, no "bureau of the DSS" function was played by the SDG. The SDG however was active on the international scene, with the organisation back to back of one of its meeting with the UNECE directors of social statistics meeting, who created a TF on emerging issues, in which 2 SDG members are represented.

For the future, it was proposed to concentrate the SDG work on strategic issues and on relations with the users (priority settings for instance). The rotation of the membership should also be envisaged.

Ms Wismer, member of the SDG, made further comments on the UNECE task force and follow up. The TF on emerging issues identified voluntary participation as a statistical issue.. A TF is being created on the topic. Participation is welcome. New family structures are also considered as an emerging issue at the international level, and a TF on the topic is also created. Finally, the TF would prepare a seminar, during which the TF on voluntary participation and on new family structure should present their report. During this seminar, the broader issue of the framework for social statistics would also be addressed.

In their comments, the DSS underlined the importance of the SDG, proposed to maintain a rhythm of 2 meetings per year, recalled Eurostat that the role of preparation of the DSS meeting, in an enlarged Europe context and with the existence of the other sectoral groups, is important and was seen as central in the mandate of the SDG. The necessity for rotating membership was also underlined.

It was concluded that the SDG would try to meet twice per year, in January and June (subject to practical constraints – dates would be chosen well in advance) The SDG has no "decision powers": it will continue to play an active role in identifying strategic issues, favouring the discussions between users and providers, and will also take a more active role in DSS organisational issues. M. Glaude call for additional strategic topics to discuss at the DSS and asked for volunteer in the context of renewed membership. It was agreed as well that Eurostat should be proactive in this renewal, in order to keep an adequate balance of participant. Dates for the next DSS meeting will be communicated in the next few weeks.

3. Final report from the task force on core social variables

The final report of the task force has been presented by Martin Zeleny, member of the task force. The presentation referred to the key elements of the document Eurostat/F/06/DSS/10/3/EN. He underlined the main guiding principles of the TF work, the difficult issues encountered (like the income variables, the self defined labour status, the interest of a socio economic classification), as well as the implementation plans, surveys by surveys, and the conclusions and next steps.

Many comments were made by the DSS. In general, the report was welcome and overall very well appreciated. The bringing to fruition of the project is seen by some participants as an achievement, in an international context.On the content of the report, many general and detailed comments were made: questions about de facto marital status, about the household (HH) definition as an economic entity, about the HH type (in particular the definition of dependant child, the classification used, the problems linked with the proxy answers, the age groups retained), cases of double citizenships, adding variables on housing conditions, etc. Whilst appreciating the work done, the needs for more detailed breakdowns have also been expressed by the users. More input harmonisation was seen as a way to increase comparability. DG EMPL called for the compatibility of the definitions to be tested against the definitions used for the main multi-dimensional lists of indicators developed in the context of EU level policy coordination. These lists typically draw on several surveys and the core variables would enhance the analytical possibilities derived from the indicators: these lists are in particular, the Laeken list (indicators for social inclusion), the EMCO list and the Structural Indicators list.

Main comments were on the income variable: the choices made by the task force on collecting net monthly income limited to wages and social transfers were questioned in several directions. It was recognised that the key element is to provide a ranking of the observations by income levels. Tests and refinement were seen as essential.

The self declared labour status is also a source of questions. At the same time, it is recognised that it differs significantly from the ILO definition (and that it could make a real difference in some countries), but that the implementation of the ILO definition in all surveys is way to expensive.

On the implementation, some delegates underlined that the core variables should be implemented only in the survey in which their relevance is established. However, it has been reaffirmed that the intention of the whole project is to collect the core variables in all the EU social surveys, many of which already comply to varying degrees. Whilst paying tribute to the fact that the TF it self asked for a dissolution due to the termination of its work, some delegates saw however that further work should be monitored in that field.

On the socio economic classification, and following a paper prepared by the French delegate, it was generally agreed that this item is important in order to better describe, categorise and compare internationally socio economic groups. The link between this project and the national implementations and international revision of the ISCO was underlined. Some delegates suggested the ESS should have some ambition in addressing the issue. The next steps should include a more active role of the ESS and Eurostat, in order to test, analyse and operationalise the socio economic classification in the context of official statistics.

To conclude, the DSS

• Endorsed the report of the task force on core social variables (subject to the next comments), and thanked the TF members for their work,
• Agreed on the proposed list of variables,
• Broadly agreed with the definitions proposed, details of definitions need to be further tested.
• Agreed on the principle that all core variable should be introduce in all EU social surveys subject to detailed discussions that should take place in the relevant working groups, having in mind the onjective of including all core variableq in all surveys by 2010,
• Noted that income cannot at this stage be included in the LFS and confirmed that the introduction of core variables in the ICT household survey cannot be done at the expense of the substance variables of this survey: when core variables would be collected, it should be in addition to the substance variables,
• Will transmit their written comments on the report by 20 October 2006 (to )
• Asked Eurostat to provide a consolidated version of the report at the next SDG meeting, with the help of the TF if needed,
• Mandated the SDG for taking actions concerning the next steps in the work,
• Welcome the proposal to further continue methodological developments and tests on a revised version of the self declared labour status and on the income variable (in the context of the EU-SILC methodological task force),
• Dissolved the task force, as soon as the consolidated manual will be issued,
• Created a new task force on socio economic classification (volunteers are asked to declare their interest at ).

4.European Household Survey (EHS): background and first proposal in relation to the content of the new EHS

Eurostat presented document F/06/DSS/10/4/EN highlighting the modified concept now foreseen for this project, change from a single survey to be carried out in all Member States (EHS) to a system of household survey modules (E4SM) which is flexible both for the demand side (with the inclusion of both short term and long term modules to answer to new Commission demands) and in terms of implementation (the different modules can either be integrated into a single or a dual operation or can be integrated in existing national instruments under constraints in terms of sampling, collection period, sample size, timeliness). It was also stressed that this was only the result of one Task Force meeting and that an important volume of work would have to be done by the TF before implementation. Eurostat insisted on the fact that for modules answering new Commission demands, input harmonisation would be an essential requirement.

The DSS agreed on the need to take active steps to develop a system of household survey modules and on the change of concept from a single survey to a flexible system of household survey modules. Consequently, the Task Force should go on with its work: a meeting will now be organised in December.

Although the change of concept was welcome, the new name (E4SM) was found too complicated by some delegates. The draft revised mandate has been accepted with a minor change proposed by UK in task 4 (Based on the foregoing (i.e. Task 3), the TF would also detail financial and regulatory implications of the different proposals/scenarios, where possible setting them in the context of a global burden). The long term perspective of this project was highlighted by several countries.

The discussion further identified an over-optimistic timescale for the implementation of the project in view for example of the SILC experience (2011 would seem much more realistic); several countries expressed views/preference on the input/output approach. Some countries asked for a more precise estimation of the total cost of the project and insisted on the importance of EU funding. On the procedure for selecting themes of modules responding to new DG demands, the DSS recommended for the SPC to have the final word. There was also a request to clarify the regulatory framework.

DG EMPL pointed out that the procedure and the timing for selecting modules need to take the constraints of the EU financing procedures into account since several Commission services may be involved. DG EMPL also needs to have an estimate of the financing needed fairly soon in order to be able to plan for it.

In terms of the specific modules, issues such as the need to include on an annual basis the EHIS indicators and the ICT component, the integration of the LFS and SILC modules into the system, the link between the proposed system and the existing operations (ICT, AES), the problems linked to the proposed split of the current AES operation into three parts were raised.

Eurostat confirmed the need for annual data on ICT and main EHIS indicators, in the context of the i2010 package of policies for ICT, for the need of European Community Health Indicators (the EHIS is only carried out every five years and there is a need for indicators with potential annual variations to be computed). It was also clarified that no duplication will be done: according to this model, the ICT and AES operations would in the long run either be implemented as currently done or be integrated in a single/dual survey depending on the national choice. The split of the AES survey would need to be further elaborated together with the AES Working Group (also in view of the results of the first data collections). It was concluded that the Task Force would tackle most of the discussed issues (cost, procedure for prioritising the themes, input/output approach, and timescale) and come back with a progress report in the next DSS meeting.

5. Draft Commission Regulation (EC) implementing European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1177/2003 on Community Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC) concerning the 2008 list of target secondary variables on financial exclusion and over indebtedness

Eurostat presented the draft Commission regulation concerning the module on ‘over indebtedness and financial exclusion’ to be included in 2008 in the cross-sectional component of the EU-SILC project. This draft Commission regulation is planned to be approved by the SPC on 16 November 2006 and adopted by the Commission at the end of 2006 or beginning of 2007.

The discussion mainly focussed on the need for a new round of written consultation of the Working Group given the fact that the format and the content of the module has somewhat changed since the last consultation of the Working Group (during summer)mainly with the drop out of type of debts and an alternative approach for the quantification of arrears. The change from a "blue print" questionnaire to a list of variables between the summer written consultation and the DSS meeting, the link with the ECB project, the definition of commercial credit and the collecting unit for this module (household or individual level) were also raised. On this last issue, the quality of collecting household information through household respondent only was especially questioned but difficulty to individual data collection given current definition (for instance use of household scale) was also recognised.

Eurostat confirmed that the current document containing the list of target variables needed to be included in the Commission regulation will be complemented by a blue print questionnaire to be available at the end of this year. It was also confirmed that there is no duplication with the Eurosystem initiative to investigate the feasibility of a survey on household finance and consumption. The focus of the possible Eurosystem survey (the realisation of which is not yet decided) would be on gathering detailed information on household assets and liabilities. An oversampliong of wealthy households would be needed to get reliable results on households’ portfolios which is in contrast to the EU SILC module focusing on low income households.

The majority of the Member States gave a favourable opinion regarding the draft Commission regulation on the 2008 EU-SILC module, but it was agreed to launcha quick written consultation of the WG (with a deadline of 22 September for answer) to produce the final version to be discussed by the SPC in November. The definition of commercial credit and the modalities of answer to the 'reasons why the household does not have commercial credit' would be slightly amended.

6. Draft Commission Regulation on LFS module 2008 on labour market situation of migrants and their immediate descendants

The draft Commission Regulation adopting the specifications of the 2008 ad hoc module on the labour market situation of migrants and their immediate descendents was presented to the DSS group.

The main aspects underlined were that the migration issues are having more and more political importance and therefore this module will be very likely repeated in 3 or 4 years. Consequently, this module will be a pilot experience in the area.

As some variables were considered as difficult (subjectivity, low quality of proxy answers, etc), Eurostat takes the engagement of:

• Making an ex post evaluation of this module during 2009 (TF with Member States). This task force will also conduct the comparative analysis of the results.
• To conduct a careful analysis of the quality data before publication
• To include warnings for data considered of less quality
• Not publishing data for individual countries where this data is under the reliability limits and use it only for the EU totals.
• Use the data from this module more for structures than for levels.

Apart from the derogation granted to countries having less than 1500 migrants in the LFS sample to do a light version of the module (only 4 variables), 2 other derogations will be granted to France (variable 214 optional) and Germany (collect information on nationality/former nationality instead of country of birth). For this last country a legal text will agreed bilaterally.