1 / 8

The 2 way Transparency Agenda for EU institutions and Associations/Groups

The 2 way Transparency Agenda for EU institutions and Associations/Groups. Justin Greenwood. Transparency & Accountability drives 21 st Century policy-making – now strong in EU Public services restructured by ensuring they become user oriented through accountability

kathryn-ballesty
Download Presentation

The 2 way Transparency Agenda for EU institutions and Associations/Groups

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The 2 way Transparency Agenda for EU institutions and Associations/Groups Justin Greenwood

  2. Transparency & Accountability drives 21st Century policy-making – now strong in EU • Public services restructured by ensuring they become user oriented through accountability • Acctabil. involves putting information in the public domain; inc for probity/confidence, eg advisors • Nordic traditions, eg access to documents • Responding to ‘democratic deficit’ & consultation agendas; transparency in draft Treaty • Public scrutiny via media, stakeholder organisations, and via the development of IT puts information in public domain & erodes bilateralism • Business calls for transparency of decision making process cannot be restricted agendas

  3. Post White Paper on Governance agenda • Extended Impact Assessments include impact on non-active • Open consultation by placing policy initiatives and drafts on the internet for comment • Justification of decision making and impact of views yielded in consultation (Consultation standards) (system heads for overload) • De facto civil dialogue? • Separate practices engage groups outside the NGO circuit

  4. Appealing over the heads of groups • Agendas for Groups - More participation for more accountability The White Paper...on Groups • civil society organisations need to tighten up their internal structures, furnish guarantees of openness and representativity, and to prove their capacity to relay information or lead debates in their member states (p.17). • Agenda encouraged by business & EP • NGOs can be sectional, but argue they are groups for a cause not of

  5. “Although it would be misleading to argue that all NGOs fail to demonstrate any such capacity, necessary structures to allow NGOs an EU socialisation function, such as the existence of methods of internal decision making which allow supporter input into NGO EU strategy, are in general conspicuous by their absence. So too are mechanisms by which NGO supporters or members can hold these organisations to account, or make an input into their decision-making”(Warleigh, 2003, p.118) “while ideally it would be good to get people involved, time pressures mean that the most effective use of my time is to get on with advocacy. In the end my role is not to encourage the most participatory governance, but to ensure the best results for the environment “ (in Sudbery, 2003, p.90)

  6. “NGOs will be unable to act as agents of civil society Europeanisation unless they are internally democratic and willing and able to act as agents of political socialisation, with particular reference to EU decision making and policy…NGOs are as yet simply not ready to play this role, and...it cannot be assumed that their capacity to act in this way will be improved....their internal governance is far too elitist to allow supporters a role in shaping policies, campaigns and strategies....Moreover, most NGO supporters do not actually want to undertake such a role...NGOs are no ‘magic bullet’ which will automatically hit the target of political socialisation” (Warleigh, 2001, p.635).

  7. Economic & Social Committee criteria • exist permanently at Community level • provide direct access to its members’ expertise & rapid/constructive consultation • represent general concerns that tally with the interest of European society • comprise bodies that are recognised at MS level as representatives of particular interests • have member orgs in most of the MS • provide for accountability for its members • have authority to represent/act at EU level • be independent & mandatory, not bound by instructions from outside bodies • be transparent, esp. financially & in its decision making structures(Opinion on WPG, 20.3.2002)

  8. The CONECCSinitiative • a new database of interest groups on Europa. Inclusion is contingent on confirming that the interest group is formally constituted, EU wide, active, with expertise, and prepared to provide information about itself. There are further compulsory questions about group establishment, objectives, and post-holders, and for those involved in EU consultative bodies, about sources of finance and details of members • Whilst inclusion on the database confers no special privileges, an open question is whether it represents the start of a de facto system of accreditation

More Related