/ EUROPEAN COMMISSION
EUROSTAT
Directorate C: National Accounts, Prices and Key Indicators
Unit C2 National and regional accounts; Balance of payments

BP/14/25Draft

Draft Minutes

of the

Balance of payments Working Group

Luxembourg, 09-10April 2014

1

Draft Minutes

of the Balance of payments Working Group (BOPWG)

Luxembourg, 10-11April2014

Item 1 Introduction by the Chairman and adoption of the agenda

  1. Ms Silke Stapel-Weber, Head of Unit “National and Regional accounts; Balance of Payments” at Eurostat welcomed the participants and chaired the meting.
  2. The agenda was unanimously adopted.
  3. The BOPWG was invited to review the minutes of the last meeting of 22-23 October 2013 and submit comments to the BOPWG Secretariat.

Item 2+ 3BPM6 based 2014 b.o.p. Vademecum and ECB’s Booklet (BP/13/32)

Reference documents: BP/14/02a, BP/14/02 (zip) and BP/14/03

  1. Eurostat presented the outline of the first edition of BPM6 based Vademecum describing requirements that will apply starting from June 2014. The structure of BPM6 based Vademecum remains similar to the BPM5 based one. It contains data transmission timetable and guidelines, b.o.p.. i.i.p., ITS and FDI questionnaires with detailed codification, descriptions of all dimensions and attributes of b.o.p. and FDI DSDs, lists of integrity rules, levels of geographical, activity and sector breakdowns and annexes with Excel versions of questionnaires, b.o.p. and FDI DSDs, as well as with BPM5/BPM6 conversion tables and metadata template on single major events and significant revisions. It was followed by presentation of new edition of ECB’s Booklet and experiences of test data transmissions. Consistency was ensured between two publications prepared by Eurostat and ECB.
  2. In the discussion delegates expressed their concern about delay in finalization of b.o.p. Vademecum and ECB Booklet, which may result in difficulties in meeting deadline for June BPM6 data transmission and asked if it was still necessary to transmit the identical datasets to both Eurostat and ECB, which, however, due to legal requirements would be requested. Spain informed about possible quality limitations in bilateral data and that due to change of compilation system it will not be in position to send BPM5 data after September. Eurostat confirmed that items and breakdowns requested on mandatory and voluntary basis are going to be distinguished in Vademecum and that for revised periods only revised items should be sent.

Item 42014 b.o.p.and FDI Data Structure Definition – Statusand future maintenance

Reference: BP/13/04a b.o.p.DSD v.1.2, BP/13/04b DSDs Maintenance agreements

  1. Eurostat outlined the latest b.o.p. DSD (v.1.2) released on 7 April 2014 and the draft Guidelines on the governance of commonly used SDMX artefacts. Structural changes such as methodological guideline revisions and reviews of official data flows content or the entire set of DSDs would only be done through extensive consultations and provided for in EU legal acts. Annual maintenance changes would follow consultation of the BOPWG and can be proposed by anybody. Any of the organisations represented in the ownership group (NAWG, BOPWG) can propose fast-track maintenance changes which are applied with immediate effect, if approved, but would be subject to review in the following annual maintenance cycle. They must not break backwards compatibility. Any new data flow outside the legally binding data transmission programme can only be implemented on a voluntary basis.
  2. Taking into account the views expressed by some BOPWG members, the group agreed to use the fast track instrument for SDMX maintenance with utmost care and to review it in one year. Requested annual changes to SDMX will be discussed at the BOPWG, which will devise an implementation plan.
  3. Member States were requested to implement IT system functionalities allowing additions to code lists in a generic way to facilitate the implementation of smaller changes.

Item 5Testing BPM6-based data transmission

Reference documents: BP/14/05

  1. The technical standards for BPM6-based data transmission and testing were discussed and Eurostat expressed its concern that so far only four countries have delivered testing files, given the timetable in place for the start of data sending to Eurostat by end-June 2014. Eurostat called for cooperation to speeding up the testing process. Member States were invited to test and real data within deadlines of the given schedule.
  2. The BOPWG appreciated receiving guidelines for the testing. Some countries may have issues in delivering FDI and ITS data in May but Eurostat invites them to send some dummy data to test the technical capabilities for data transmission. The BOPWG took also note of the fact that Eurostat will currently not be able to receive SDMX-ML 2.1 messages and concerns were raised about that as it was suggested that ECB and Eurostat should adopt the same standard. The ECB, to facilitate the process, advised that the counties should focus on testing data transmission with SDMX-ML 2.0 messages and that will also accept both SDMX-ML 2.0 and 2.1 formats. Member States will be informed as soon as SDMX 2.1 messages can be transmitted to Eurostat.

Item 6Dissemination of BPM6-based data via Eurobase

Reference documents: BP/14/06, BP/14/06a

  1. Eurostat presented its policy for dissemination of quarterly and annual BPM6-basedb.o.p.data using an ad-hoc dimension. Reporting of monthly and quarterly data to Eurostat will start in June 2014 with 2014Q1 and 2014M04 data sets. Complete time series of BPM6 data on b.o.p. and i.i.p.and annual ITS and FDI data are expected in September 2014. Eurostat and ECB will start disseminating EU and EA Monthly and Quarterly aggregates end-October 2014.
  2. The main problem to address when considering how to disseminate BPM6 data is that the new b.o.p.DSD has 16+1 dimensions whereas a maximum of 8 dimensions are available in Eurobase[1] and can be displayed to users. To tackle this, Eurostat proposes to collapse some of the dimensions, creating a new dimension, only used for dissemination that merges the codes of some of the dimensions included in b.o.p.DSD.
  3. In the discussion the BOPWG emphasised the need to align Eurostat and Member States’ calendars for dissemination of BPM6-based national b.o.p. and i.i.p. national data to ensure no national data is disseminated at EU level before it is published at national level.
  4. The BOPWG welcomed Eurostat’s BPM6 data dissemination policy. All BPM6-based national b.o.p.received and validated by Eurostat will be disseminated, unless they are flagged with “C”/Confidential or “N”/Not for publication. Consistent use of confidentiality flags by Member States is therefore of utmost importance when sending data to Eurostat.

Item 7 What BPM6-based national data will be disseminated

Reference documents: BP/14/07

  1. Eurostat presented the outcome of a questionnaire on the next delivery of annual ITS and FDI statistics as well as the plans for the dissemination of these data according to the different methodologies and applicable reference periods. It was highlighted that depending on the data delivered by each Member State, Eurostat may need to convert the data in order to calculate EU aggregates. As regards the coverage of the national data to be provided, it was indicated that data has to be provided referred to all resident units (including resident SPE); only in annual FDI, specific data for resident SPE have to be provided separately.
  2. In the following discussion, some Member States expressed doubts about the dissemination of monthly b.o.p. data due to low quality and proposed the dissemination on data excluding SPEs at quarterly b.o.p. and i.i.p. level. The consistency of quarterly and annual ITS data was questioned taking into account that the quarterly data will be back casted for more years than the annual data; this could also provoke comparability problems between national data disseminated by Eurostat and by individual Member States. The importance of applying secondary confidentiality treatment to the data delivered by the Member States was highlighted.
  3. In the reaction to the discussion Eurostat explained that the delivery of annual ITS statistics back casted data according BPM6 for reference years 2010-2012 could take place at a later stage than September 2014. A priority will be given to the treatment and dissemination of the annual 2013 data. Compatibility between annual ITS data is expected from 2010 onwards as annual data will be back casted only until that year.Eurostat and the ECB will continue applying secondary confidentiality treatment to the national incoming data as currently done.
  4. The BOPWG took note of the plans for the dissemination of annual FDI and ITS data regarding EU aggregates and national data. Dissemination of internationally comparable data is very important for ECB and Eurostat.The publication of monthly data will be revisited in the October 2014 BOPWG and will not take place before December 2014.

Item 8 Transferring BPM5-based data to a BPM6-based structure - Update of the conversion tables

Reference documents: BP/14/08, BP/14/08a

  1. The BOPWG was informed of the latest updates to the conversion tables for mapping BPM5-basedFDI and ITS data to Eurostat’s BPM6 Oracle/ MDT b.o.p. database. They focus mainly on the update of the geographical breakdown conversion tool and the update of "BPM5 to BPM6" conversion matrix for the transfer of ITS data. New conversion tools were presented in the field of FDI to allow a partial mapping of BPM5/BD3-based FDI data into the new b.o.p./FDI DSD structures. The revised conversion tables will be annexed to the BPM6-based b.o.p. Vademecum, edition April 2014.
  2. From a methodological point of view, Eurostat cannot convert countries’ FDI data; if needed some Member States may be asked for a reclassification of non-revised FDI items according to the asset/liability principle. Eurostat does not request back casted annual FDI data before 2013 according to BPM6/BD4 methodology, and it will not need to use a “BPM5 to BPM6” conversion matrix to compile its EU aggregates.
  3. The BOPWG expressed its appreciation of the conversion tables. A particular question was raised concerning the reference year for calculation of ITS and quarterly b.o.p. back-data.
  4. In the following discussion the year 2010 was agreed as the reference year as of which all Member States will have converted BPM6 annual ITS data.For the periods for which Member States cannot provide these data, and as far as possible, Eurostat will convert directly the national BPM5-based ITS data existing in Eurostat’s database. This does not mean that Eurostat will be able to make a full methodologically sound conversion of the data provided by Member States from BPM5 to BPM6 but simply to transfer as much as possible the BPM5 data into the new Data Structure Definition (DSD). A dedicated "ITS conversion matrix"has been developed for this purpose (see BP/14/08a) and was presented to the BOPWG.
  5. Eurostat confirmed that Member States will be consulted on any national data converted by Eurostat and the ECB data before its publication.

Item 9aThe experience of France – firstEU country to go live with BPM6

Reference documents: BP/14/09a

  1. Bank of France provided a debriefing on its first release on 19 March 2014 of key monthly b.o.p. items according to BPM6(reference month January 2014).
  2. The changeover to BPM6 was supported by an incremental, multi-channel, non-technical communication policy from July 2013 until end-2014. It stressed the two main features of the changeover – BPM6 as a worldwidestandard and transition coordinated at EU level. Key characteristics include non-technical explanation of the rationale of the BPM6, emphasis on improved consistency with National Accounts, better cross-country analysis and explanation of selected of methodological concepts (change of economic ownership, accrual basis, merchanting, goods for processing, FISIM).
  3. The discussion centered on the main challenges and lessons learnt, particularly the simultaneous change of the data collection system, the IT and the methodological system and the need for consistent coordination at national level between central banks and statistical institutes.
  4. Eurostat and the BOPWG congratulated France on this timely achievement. Particularly appreciated was the outline of France’sBPM6 communication strategy and its proposal for further bilateral contacts on this matter.

Item 9ESA2010 and BPM6 communication – stepsforward

Reference documents: BP/14/09

  1. The ECB presented the different steps of communication as explained in document BP/14/09. The detailed communication strategy incorporates plans at individual country level, local ECB initiatives and elements of a communication plan for the ESCB.
  2. Most European countries will organise their communication on the introduction of BPM6 and ESA2010in the form of press releases, conferences, dedicated webpages, articles, ad-hoc publications and user seminars. At ECB level, the first release of the new BPM6/ESA2010 data will be presented in an ECB Executive Board seminar (possibly also Governing Council) in October/November 2014. Bilateral sessions with business areas focusing on specific needs will be organised internally in ECB from May 2014 onwards. To improve the understanding of the media regarding background for changes, the ECB will hold informal briefings of the media tentatively planned for May/ June. Communication activities at ESCB/ ESS level include changeover websites for BPM6 by ECB and ESA2010 by Eurostat and possibly a joint ECB/ Eurostat press release and methodological notes in domains of joint responsibility, i.e. sector accounts and b.o.p. and i.i.p. end-October/ November 2014.
  3. In the discussion, DG ECFIN stressed the importance of early communication to users on the changes introduced to the new BPM6/ESA2010 data. Early warnings in case there might be problems with BPM6 data would be particularly helpful.
  4. Eurostat invited the members of the BOPWG to link their national websites to Eurostat and ECBchangeover websites on BMP6 and ESA2010.
  5. The BOPWG welcomed a coordinated communication strategy. In autumn 2014, shortly after the introduction of ESA 2010/BPM6, Eurostat and ECB will organise a joint event for journalists and users on the introduction of the new standards.

Item 10Progress in the dissemination of national data

Reference documents: BP/14/10

  1. Eurostat presented the updated progress report on the transmission and dissemination of national data, including the geographical breakdown and bilateral data. By end-March 2014, eight countries (Belgium, Czech Republic, Estonia, Croatia, Malta, Netherlands, Poland and Romania) delivered, on purely voluntary basis, the bilateral quarterly b.o.p. figures.
  2. Some members of the BOPWG expressed doubt if the number of available cells is an adequate indicator of data quality.
  3. Eurostat thanked all Member States that started delivering an increased number of b.o.p. data, including bilateral figures and encouraged the rest to provide them.

Item 11EU asymmetry progress report

Reference documents: BP/14/11, BO/14/11a

  1. Eurostat presented the EU asymmetry progress report showing yearly and quarterly (newly added item) aggregated data about asymmetries at EU level.
  2. The BOPWG discussed the latest bilateral asymmetry tables. Concerns over limited progress in tackling asymmetries, particularly most persistent asymmetries, were expressed. It was agreed to address this issue in autumn 2014, when Member States will be able to allocate the necessary resources after the introduction of BPM6. For this purpose, Member States will define priorities at national level for resolving asymmetries. Eurostat will do the same from an EU perspective and there will be further follow up on this in the October 2014.
  3. Regarding the quarterly asymmetries more Member States expressed doubts about the possibility to asses them this year, due to the lack of resources at national level.

Item 12 MIP related initiatives relevant for b.o.p.

Reference documents: BP/14/12

  1. Eurostat presented the main points from the final report of the CMFB Task Force on the quality of the statistics underlying the MIP indicators. The CMFB Task Force (co-chaired by Eurostat and ECB) met twice in October 2013 and December 2013 and consisted of delegates from NSIs and NCBs from 17 Member States. The final report proposed a quality management framework for MIP relevant statistics, based on reporting and monitoring of the quality and improvement actions. It suggested that a reference should be made to the principles laid down in the ESS Code of Practice and the ESCB Public Commitment. Quality management of MIP relevant statistics should follow a "three level (top-down) approach". On top, Eurostat and ECB prepared a common ESS-ESCB quality assessment report on MIP statistics (level 1), based on quality reports produced by ESS and ESCB in their fields of competence, e.g. quality reports prepared by Working Groups (level 2), and considered country specific quality work under the responsibility of the relevant NSI/NCB (level 3). It was expected that the CMFB Task Force report would be adopted by the CMFB by written procedure before the next CMFB Plenary meeting on 4 July 2014.
  2. The pilot project on draft templates for inventories of sources and methods launched by the MIP Task Force was finalised in spring 2014. During this exercise, Eurostat prefilled templates for inventories on the basis of smart questions – as proposed by the CMFB Task Force for 5 MIP headline indicators (ULC, HPI, unemployment, current account balance as % of GDP, private credit flow/private debt) and Member States participating in the project were asked for review and to comment on the smart questions and replies in view of their conceptual relevance, feasibility to reply to, interpretation and utility.
  3. The main results of the pilot testing showed that the selected concepts used in the pilot project template are relevant and viable. However, some questions were considered to be quite detailed. Sometimes there was no clear correlation between question and prefilled reply. Moreover, it should be clarified whether information should refer to the indicator or the underlying time-series and, in some specific cases, if European or national information should be reported. Overall, the pilot project template was considered to be appropriate and efficient for use in a quality assessment of MIP relevant data and a quality management system. Interpretation of the information in such a template would make it possible to assess comparability among Member States. The participants in the pilot project estimated on average that they would need 1-2 weeks to complete the empty fields, but this reflected significant differences between indicators/domains. Piloting Member States did not observe any significant gaps in the template. The pilot project showed that several elements of concepts are common for all statistical domains underlying the MIP scoreboard and relevant for all Member States, including concepts relating to the institutional environment, statistical processes and the statistical output.
  4. In order to establish a common frame for documenting statistical processes, the MIP TF proposed to the joint Directors of Methodology Group and IT Directors Group (DIME/ITDG) the development of an ESS standard and reporting structure for inventories (statistical processes). This would build on the Single Integrated Metadata Structure (SIMS), the ESS Code of Practice framework and the existing practical implementation experiences of ESMS and ESQRS. The DIME/ITDG supported the proposal during its meeting in March 2014. Further, the Task Force on the Implementation of Metadata Standards will discuss a first draft at its meeting on 14-15 May 2014, and the discussion will continue at the WG on Metadata meeting on 2-3 July 2014. The results will be presented at the DMES and the DIME/ITDG in autumn 2014.
  5. The delegates of the BOPWG were informed that the MIP TF sent on 20 March 2014 a questionnaire to DMES members on estimating the possible impact on MIP headline indicators following the implementation of the new statistical requirements, with a deadline of 28 May 2014.
  6. During the discussion which followed, some Member States stressed that a potential duplication of quality related work should be avoided and a coordinated approach was necessary. This required a sharing of information between Eurostat and the ECB. Eurostat replied that this concern was addressed by the CMFB Task Force. Another Member State proposed to consult the CMFB during the process of finalising standards for inventories.

Item 13Draft of BPM6 based b.o.p. quality report