Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on 'Cooperation with charitable associations as economic and social partners in the field of social welfare'
C 73/92 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 3. 98 The group welcomes the Commission’s analysis. It generally supports the proposals for action and hopes that they will be of help to Member States in their efforts to overcome the problems. In particular the group believes that the following aspects should be the subject of detailed consideration: — the benefit structure and the relationship of benefits to one another; — the targetting of benefits to those in greatest need; — helping long-term recipients to equip themselves for employment; — the interface between tax and benefits for the lower paid with better incentives to accept employment; — encouraging individual responsibility; — a gradual move towards long-term funding of at least a portion of retirements benefits; — an increasing partnership between public and private provision. Finally the group applauds the efforts which the Commission is making to remove remaining obstacles to free movement in the field of social protection. ’ Mr/Mrs/Miss: ANDRADE, BAGLIANO, BARROS VALE, BEALE, BOUSSAT, BREDIMA SAVOPOU- LOU, BURANI, BYRNE, DE NORRE, DONOVAN, FRANZ, GARDNER, GAUDER, GIESECKE, HAMRO-DROTZ, HORNUNG-DRAUS, JOHANSEN, KIELMAN, KONTIO, LEHNHOFF, LEVITT, LINSSEN, LITTLE, MALOSSE, MEGHEN, MOBBS, MORGAN, NOORDWAL, RAVOET, REGNELL, REITERER, SIRKEINEN, WALKER, WHITWORTH. Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on ‘Cooperation with charitable associations as economic and social partners in the field of social welfare’ (98/C 73/23) On 20 March 1997 the Economic and Social Committee decided, in pursuance of Rule 23(3) of the Rules of Procedure, to draw up an Opinion on: ‘Cooperation with charitable associations as economic and social partners in the field of social welfare’. The Section for Social, Family, Educational and Cultural Affairs, which was instructed to prepare the Committee’s work on this matter, adopted its opinion on 17 October 1997. The rapporteur was Mrs zu Eulenburg. At its 350th plenary session (meeting of 10 December 1997) the Economic and Social Committee adopted the opinion set out below by 75 votes to six, with seven abstentions. COOPERATION WITH CHARITABLE ASSOCI- ATIONS AS ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL PARTNERS Preamble Charitable associations have helped to shape the welfare state in the EU. The wide variety of services and facilities which they provide have historical roots. Economic progress went hand-in-hand with trends entailing social inequality and impoverishment. In the 19th century industrialization led to profound changes in people’s everyday lives. The churches, and their religious com- munities, affluent citizens and aristocrats and a great variety of social organizations, such as workers’ associ- ations were active in the social welfare field. They founded social services and social establishments. In many European countries, the state stood aside, taking action only at a very late stage and in accordance with the different ways in which the social security systems developed in the various states. Charitable associations do not only provide social services and facilities; they also motivate people to work voluntarily for the common good and they see themselves as advocates of the needy. They are thus promoters of social justice. Charitable associations form part of the ‘third sector’, which is highly important to European economies and constitutes an extremely multi-faceted phenomenon for which there is no clear and definitive definition. Differing national mindsets, differences as regards the levels at 9. 3. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 73/93 which action is taken and, above all, the involvement of disparate interest groups (such as charitable work by members of the public and the churches and self-help establishments set up by workers’ movements) all help to make the ‘third sector’ into a really multifarious phenomenon. This very variety does, however, make it typically European. The European welfare state owes its special character to the existence of the ‘third sector’. The ‘third sector’ is also the area of the economy in which the general public is involved directly, i. e. not as part of earning a living or through state intervention. ‘Partnerships’, which individuals may join on a free and voluntary basis and which do not involve making capital investments or private profit, have, generally speaking, been established in all EU Member States. These partnerships are of three types: cooperatives, insurance associations and other associations. Persons joining the first two types of partnership are entitled to receive services and benefits. This is not systematically the case with regard to ‘other associations’, which may also help non-members. In principle, charitable associations focus on the general public. The beneficiaries of services provided by these associations are people who suffer from particular social disadvantages or who need social help on an occasional or long-term basis. Services are provided on a non-profit basis, i. e. there is no selection on the basis of market criteria. The challenge currently facing charitable associ- ations lies in the systematic commercialization of the meeting of social needs. If charitable associations were fully exposed to unregulated competition from profit- oriented providers, the latter would by their very nature, operate only in the areas where they can make a profit. Charitable associations would then have great difficulty in carrying out the task of providing general social care, particularly in view of the cost of providing a full range of services. Charitable associations do not, however, merely provide social services. The contribution of volunteer helpers — who are an essential feature of charitable associations — demonstrates how these associations form part of the ‘civil dialogue’. The voluntary social commitment of as many people as possible is a prerequisite for the establishment and development of a community spirit in society. The subsidiarity concept is put into effect by a number of vehicles — self-help groups, neighbourhood assistance groups, voluntary workers, parishes and secular associations. Charitable associations are a focal point for this commitment. Whilst not ruling out similarities with the other forms of ‘partnership’, this opinion will confine itself to dealing with charitable associations in the sense of organizations dedicated to the pursuit of social solidarity. This will also make it possible to take account of the great variety of legal forms under which social work is carried out. 1. Introduction 1. 1. Charitable associations are to be found in all the EU Member States. They generally see their role in all states as that of key players in the field of social protection, notably as — defenders of social rights; — advocates of the disadvantaged and victims of social exclusion; — bodies which give enhanced effect to voluntary social commitment; — forums for the achievement of social progress; — sources of innovation in the development of social assistance; — members of democratically- representative, constituted associations or organizations having similar legal forms; — non profit-orientated providers of social services working for the good of society. 1. 2. The needs for which charitable associations cater (providing help in cases of social and health problems, isolation, social exclusion, disabilities, etc. ) are increas- ing steadily and becoming ever more complex. By virtue of the measures they take, charitable associations bring an influence to bear on the quality of help provided in the public welfare sector and help to make the profit-orientated sector extend its selection of benefi- ciaries to include a broader range of society. Here too, charitable associations are champions of solidarity and responsibility in society. 1. 3. The employment of volunteers is an intrinsic feature of charitable associations. They provide a back-up for paid workers, rather than a replacement; paid staff provide a guarantee of continuity and exper- tise. Voluntary unpaid work is never a substitute for paid staff; it represents participation by members of the public in the shaping of the community. Volunteers tailor their work according to their own perceptions. This type of work is one of the ways of linking freedom and responsibility in democratic societies. 1. 4. The importance of charitable associations in the economy as a whole is frequently underestimated. They occupy a position between the public sector and the market sector. As non-governmental organizations, they are voluntary and are not under a statutory obligation to carry out their work. They are not motivated by profit in the same way as commercial enterprises in the private sector. The European court of Justice, too, has recently recognized the special status of charitable associations; it has ruled that under EU law all Member States are entitled to give priority treatment to charitable associations over other profit-orientated enterprises (Judgement No C-70/95 — Sodemare v. Regionale Lombardia). Charitable associations now operate on a C 73/94 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 3. 98 very large scale (see the detailed information set out in Appendix I). 1. 4. 1. Charitable associations are also able to con- tribute to a certain extent towards creating additional jobs, even against a background of a stagnating or slowly growing labour market. Funding used by charitable associations has a high level of added value since it: — is systematically targeted at points where social problems are most acute; — is used to support work carried out by a large number of volunteer helpers: — is augmented by voluntary donations from the public. 1. 5. The role of charitable associations as actors in the field of social policy in the EU has been recognized (see Appendix II). The Final Act of the EU Treaty contains a Declaration No 23: ‘The Conference stresses the importance, in pursuing the objectives of Article 117 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, of cooperation between the latter and charitable associ- ations and foundations as institutions responsible for social welfare establishments and services. ’ The Amster- dam Treaty gives recognition to Declaration 23 insofar as reference is made to Article 117 of the Treaty establishing the European Community which sets out the principle underlying social policy; the incorporation of the social agreement in the Treaty gives this article a new, more lasting importance. 1. 6. Agreement was reached in Amsterdam on a declaration on voluntary services which is, however, not confined to social welfare work. The declaration reads as follows: ‘The Conference recognizes the important contri- bution made by voluntary service activities to developing social solidarity. The Community will encourage the European dimension of voluntary organizations with particular emphasis on the exchange of information and experiences as well as on the participation of the young and the elderly in voluntary work. ’ 2. Aim of the present own-initiative opinion 2. 1. This own-initiative opinion has a twofold aim: (a) to heighten awareness of the role and importance of charitable associations as economic and social partners in the EU and as important players who are active in various areas of social policy and (b) to put forward concrete proposals on measures for institutionalizing cooperation with charitable associations and placing it on a systematic footing. 2. 2. The starting point for the present opinion is Declaration No 23 (Final Act of the Maastricht Treaty) on cooperation with charitable associations. The declar- ation also covers cooperation with all organizations working in the field of social welfare, thereby according with the view unanimously expressed in the hearing of these organizations arranged by the study group. The term ‘establishments and services’ for which charitable associations are responsible, as set out in Declaration No 23, must be broadly defined in this context. The term covers all organizations involved in carrying out long-term measures, designed to have a lasting effect, to help persons dependent upon all forms of social assistance (for information on the characteristics of the various forms of charitable associations, see Appendix II) 2. 3. Declaration No 23 must be construed in such a way if the EU unification process is to accommodate the disparate circumstances of charitable associations in the Member States. The range of activities of charitable associations extends — depending on the approach to social welfare and the social policy pursued by the state concerned — from stimulating and enabling people to engage in self-help and helping others to the operation of non-profit enterprises providing social services. The aim of all these measures is to provide people facing particular situations in life with the support they need. This is the only way to ensure that Declaration No 23 will have the desired European dimension. 2. 4. In this context particular attention should be paid to the fact that the term ‘charitable associations’ has specific connotations in all the official languages of the EU, linked to their respective linguistic culture. These terms cannot, however, unreservedly be squared with the understanding of charitable associations pre- vailing in the culture of the individual states; the position of charitable associations depends entirely on the politi- cal and legal framework of the respective states. As regards the application of the term ‘charitable associ- ations’ in the EU, this is a special term under EU law, the interpretation of which requires constant updating in both the Community and the Member States. This very goal is one of the particular objectives of the present opinion. 3. Rationale of closer cooperation between the EU and the charitable associations 3. 1. Solidarity and subsidiarity must be key principles underlying all social policies. These principles are, however, still by no means fully recognized, either by EU law or policies, as regards the links between charitable associations as players in the field of social protection (in the sense of solidarity and social cohesion) and the provision of state services in this field. Under the EU Treaty, the principle of subsidiarity, for example, has so far applied only to relations between the EU and the respective Member States. A large number of questions have still to be answered at EU level, however, as regards parity of status and value between the work of charitable associations and that of bodies operated by central governments or local authorities or by private, commercial concerns. Initial steps have, however, been taken, to accommodate these principles, such as the abovementioned Declaration No 23, which would have no particular meaning in the absence of the background of political debate on the principles of solidarity and subsidiarity. 9. 3. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 73/95 3. 2. Charitable associations constitute an important economic and social group in the social protection systems of the individual Member States and at the level of the European Union, whose Member States are becoming ever more closely linked. The ESC takes the view that this is in itself reason enough to welcome the presence of members representing charitable associ- ations. The desired civil dialogue will be achieved yet more effectively if charitable associations are adequately represented at the ESC. 3. 3. In spite of the differences in social protection systems, there is increasing agreement in the EU Member States about the proven value of leaving charitable associations their full independence but incorporating their services in public social protection schemes. The work and services provided by charitable associations have a complementary role to play alongside the social policy pursued by the public sector; such work and services do not, however, take the place of the latter policy. It is accepted, on the one hand, that state authorities, by themselves, are not in a position to provide all the necessary help; the requisite resources can only be made available through joint action between public and private welfare organizations. On the other hand, it has also been recognized that social services can frequently be provided by charitable associations at lower cost and in a manner which is more in tune with needs. Charitable associations accept competition with 3. 4. private, commercial bodies. They approve of compe- tition in particular in areas where it may help to increase efficiency and improve the instruments and methods; they likewise endorse competition based on common quality criteria for social welfare services, linked to equivalent requirements, which should be clearly defined. The introduction of market economy pro- cedures should however by unreservedly rejected where they would have a detrimental effect on people in need of assistance. As a general principle, the market economy model geared to making maximum profit does not work in the social welfare fields. There is one decisive reason for this own- 3. 5. initiative opinion which also emerged from the hearing of the representatives of the organizations invited to the study group’s first meeting. This reason is the common political recognition of the fact that organizations such as charitable associations, which provide social welfare establishments and services in the EU Member States, play a key role by involving as many members of the public as possible in maintaining social harmony and making available to them the social services which they really need. 3. 5. 1. One of the risks attendant upon the trend, which can be observed at both EU and world-wide levels, of placing an economic value on all social processes lies in the exclusion of more and more people from receiving assistance. Such exclusion is a threat to the human dignity of its victims; human dignity can only be maintained if a minimum level of care is provided. Solidarity must be the guiding principle behind the overall development of society. 4. Proposals 4. 1. One of the most important tasks of charitable associations is to draw attention in public debates and the legislative process to the concerns of the victims of social exclusion, who are inadequately represented in public bodies. With this aim in view the following action needs to be taken at EU level: — charitable associations need to be consulted and their views heard; — recognition must be given to the special importance of charitable associations as champions of social rights and providers of social services; — cooperation must be promoted between charitable associations in Europe and between charitable associations and the EU. A factor of decisive importance here is that the way in which cooperation is organized with the charitable associations must not be determined by the internal administrative structure of the individual DGs at the Commission. A further point which is clear is that to date the Commission has no special institutional machinery for addressing explicitly the question of Declaration No 23 or the area of social policy which it covers. Bearing in mind these two factors, the proposals set out below are intended only to provide guidelines as to how Declaration No 23 may be implemented. 4. 2. One possibility is for the Commission to define responsibilities more clearly, for example in the case of DG V — Employment, Industrial Relations and Social Affairs, in order thereby to take account of the need to coordinate and further develop cooperation between the EU and the charitable associations. The different roles of charitable associations in the individual Member States should be examined, especially in the light of their different functions in the various fields of social work. One of the tasks should be to collect more precise statistical data on charitable associations in the EU as a social phenomenon, particularly as regards work carried out by volunteers. The Commission is urged to examine whether it already has machinery for carrying out these tasks or whether such machinery will have to be established. 4. 3. The same considerations should apply in respect of administrative measures to be taken by DG XXIII — Enterprise Policy, Distributive Trades, Tourism, Cooperatives if new administrative measures are required in the light of the Commission’s communication on non-profit associations; these measures, too, could take account of the special characteristics of charitable associations as institutions responsible for social welfare establishments and services. Overall, steps must however be taken to ensure that the general social dimension of private charitable associations is not addressed only from the point of view of economic and business considerations. 4. 4. When providing assistance, the Commission should take account of the particular situation of charitable associations. Tendering procedures should be drawn up in such a way as to ensure that the participation C 73/96 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 3. 98 of charitable associations is neither ruled out nor jeopardized. In the case of jointly financed measures, recognition should be given to all the usual sources of funding open to charitable associations, including the work of voluntary and unpaid helpers. 4. 5. With a view to putting cooperation into practice, and placing the support policy in this field on a permanent footing, provision should be made for a specific, appropriately funded support programme entitled ‘cooperation with charitable associations’, to follow up the current pilot project on cooperation with charitable associations; this support programme should be enacted by means of a Council Decision. 4. 5. 1. One of the main aims should be to exchange information and views on best practice as regards cooperation on the part of charitable associations with a view to securing the particular resources which typify charitable associations; such cooperation involves, in particular, cooperation with volunteers. 4. 5. 2. This could also tie in with practical measures for bringing about the promotion of voluntary services in the EU, as provided for in the new declaration in the Amsterdam Treaty. After a period of three years, the ESC should 4. 6. draw up a further own-initiative opinion reviewing implementation of the above recommendations and setting out any requisite new proposals and action. Brussels, 10 December 1997. The President of the Economic and Social Committee Tom JENKINS Statistics on the economic importance of charitable associations APPENDIX I There are very few meaningful statistics in respect of charitable associations in the EU (and indeed in respect of the third sector overall). The main problem which has to be faced when compiling statistics in respect of the third sector and charitable associations is the differing structures to be found in the individual states. These differences derive from different historical and political — and also religious and cultural — developments. The lack of comparable data has also helped to bring about a situation in which the social and economic importance of charitable associations in the EU has been underestimated. The three tables set out below are derived mainly from the following publication: Salamon, Laster M; Anheier, Helmut K. ; Sakolowaki, S. Wajciech, and associates: The Emerging Sector: A Statistical Supplement — The Johns Hopkins University Institute for Policy Studies, Baltimore 1996. The following Commission publication was consulted for comparison purposes: European Communities — Commission (DG XXIII): the cooperative, mutual and non-profit sector in the European Union — Office for Official Publications in the European Communities, Luxembourg, 1997. None of the data set out here are derived from official statistics or other statistics drawn up on the basis of criteria agreed amongst the EU Member States. In order to enable an assessment to be made of the value of the three tables, a commentary is set out below on the survey on which the tables are mainly based. Commentary In order to obtain internationally comparable basic statistical data, the Johns Hopkins Institute for Policy Studies in Baltimore carried out a research programme in various states, including five EU Member States. The purpose of the survey was to provide a statistical representation of the social and economic importance of the third sector. Very careful attention was paid, in determining the way in which the survey was carried out, to ensuring that the statistical data relating to the individual states was reciprocally comparable. The Johns Hopkins Institute survey closely examines, using the same methodology throughout, the whole area covered by the third sector in five EU Member States — France, Germany, Italy, Sweden and the UK — together with Hungary, Japan and the USA. The survey covered charitable organizations which — were non-profit-orientated, — had a formal structure, 9. 3. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 73/97 — were administratively independent of the state, — had administrative autonomy, and — did not constitute mandatory associations or have compulsory membership. The following type of organizations were expressly excluded. — public enterprises and bodies (including publicly-owned and operated enterprises), — organizations having a primarily religious purpose (e. g. church administrations, religious bodies and cults), — organizations having a primarily political purpose (e. g. political parties), — cooperatives (e. g. producers’ and consumers’ cooperatives), — mutual organizations (e. g. insurance associations). The organizations were broken down into the 12 groups set out below, using a standard classification [the International Classification of Non-profit Organizations (ICNPO)]: 1) Culture and leisure, 2) Education and research, 3) Public health, (hospitals and similar bodies, nursing homes and similar bodies, psychiatric clinics and similar bodies, and other public health organizations), 4) Social services (social services and similar social welfare bodies, bodies operating in the fields of protection and assistance in the event of disasters and financial support and assistance), 5) The environment, 6) Development, housing and employment (development, community work, housing, employment and vocational training), 7) Legal issues, interests of citizens and consumers, political issues, 8) Foundations, voluntary donations, unpaid work, 9) International activities, 10) Religion, 11) Economic associations, occupational associations, trade unions, 12) Miscellaneous organizations. Using the above classification it is possible to determine the areas of activity of the charitable associations to which the various statistics refer. The activity profile of charitable associations points to the fact that they are particularly active in Group 3 (public health) and Group 4 (social services); there is also a degree of overlapping with activities listed under Group 6 (development, housing and employment). Group 9 (international activities) embraces development cooperation carried out by charitable associations; there is also further overlapping with Group 2 (training and research) and Group 7 (legal issues, interests of citizens and consumers, politics) and Group 8 (foundations). The statistical data in respect of Group 3 (public health) and Group 4 (social services) may basically be regarded as representative of the work of charitable associations; Group 6 (development, housing and employment) and Group 9 (international activities) do however also come into contention in this respect. There are, however, a number of caveats: (a) reference has already been made earlier to the major structural differences between individual states, (b) the survey carried out by the Johns Hopkins Institute for Policy Studies sought to cover the full range of the third sector and did not seek primarily to provide a statistical picture of charitable associations. It therefore follows that data in respect of the charitable associations can only be inferred indirectly — and therefore with some degree of imprecision — from the abovementioned ICNPO classification, (c) the third caveat is more a matter of principle: in highly complex societies it is difficult to classify many organizations, thereby producing imprecise data. The Johns Hopkins survey is the only survey carried out to date which permits comparisons to be made at international level; despite criticisms relating to detailed aspects of the survey, the fact remains that it has been scientifically recognized and has been quoted by the Commission when appropriate, such as in the communication from the Commission on the promotion of the role of non-profit associations and foundations in Europe (COM(97) 241 final). C 73/98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 3. 98 The Commission, for its part, published a survey on cooperatives, mutual associations and the non-profit sector in the EU in 1997 (quoted above). The statistical data was collected by means of questionnaires issued to leading local and national organizations. These statistics, in particular those relating to the non-profit sector, are of a very general nature, classified only very imprecisely and by no means complete. By contrast, the Johns Hopkins’ survey is more complete and classified by subject to a much more accurate degree. It is possible to make comparisons between both surveys in respect of France, Germany and the UK (as regards Italy, the Commission’s survey quotes data from the Johns Hopkins’ survey). In the case of the abovementioned three states, data from the Commission survey in the field of ‘health and social work’ can be compared with data from ICNPO 3 (public health) and ICNPO 4 (social services) from the Johns Hopkins’ survey. Expenditure on public health and social services, expressed as a percentage of GDP, is put at 1,45 % in the Johns Hopkins’ survey in the case of France, as against 1,39 % in the Commission survey. The corresponding figures given in the respective surveys for Germany are 2,07 % and 1,92 % and, in the case of the UK, 0,72 % and 0,72 %. Despite differences in methodology between the two surveys, there is a high level of conformity between the two sets of statistical data. Both surveys highlight the economic importance of charitable associations. TABLE 1 Number of jobs (full-time jobs) provided by the third sector and charitable associations (1990) Jobs provided by the third sector as a percentage of the overall number of jobs (1) Number of jobs (1) provided by charitable associations (2) (%) Overall number of jobs (’000) (%) As a percentage of overall number of jobs in the service sector As a percentage of the overall number of jobs in the third sector 4,20 3,70 1,80 2,50 4,00 487,5 720,9 223,7 24,7 245,7 2,57 2,79 0,96 0,75 1,21 6,15 7,75 2,93 1,55 2,92 61,2 74,6 53,4 29,9 30,2 State France Germany (West) Italy Sweden UK (1) Full-time equivalent jobs. (2) ICNPO Groups 3, 4, 6 and 9. TABLE 2 Economic performance (expenditure) of the third sector and charitable associations (1990) State Third sector performance as a percentage of GDP Economic performance of charitable associations (1) As a percentage of GDP As a percentage of third sector performance France Germany (West) Italy Sweden UK (1) ICNPO Groups 3, 4, 6 and 9. 3,34 3,58 1,99 3,95 4,80 1,70 2,65 0,84 1,03 1,27 50,9 73,9 41,3 25,9 26,5 9. 3. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 73/99 TABLE 3 Trends in the size of the workforce of the third sector and charitable associations in France and Germany in comparison with the corresponding figures for the economy as a whole (period 1980/1981 to 1990/1991) State Ref. Period France Germany (West) 1981-1991 1980-1990 Trends in size of workforce (expressed as %) Third sector + 40 + 36 Charitable associations Whole economy + 67 (1) + 30 (2) + 3,1 + 5,3 (3) (1) Data covers only ICNPO Groups 3 and 4. (2) Calculations made by the author on the basis of statistical data on charitable care organizations in Germany [overall statistics for private charitable care establishments, Bonn 1994 (in German)]. (3) German Federal Statistical Office 1996 (long series of data on economic development). APPENDIX II Charitable associations in the EU EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT Declaration No 23, Budget heading B 3-4101 The European Parliament took an initial step to implement Declaration No 23 by including in the budget since 1993 funds for ‘cooperation with charitable associations’; in 1996 ECU 2 million were allocated for that purpose. The 1997 budget includes a new heading B3-4101 ‘cooperation with charitable associations and with non-governmental organizations and associations looking after elderly people’; funding of ECU 4 million has been allocated under this heading. The proposal made by the Chairman of the European Parliament’s Committee on Social Affairs, Mr Stephen Hughes, that a new budget heading ‘civil dialogue’ be included in the 1997 budget was not accepted by the EP. For the 1998 budget the Commission once again proposed that a separate budget heading be introduced, under the simplified title ‘cooperation with charitable associations’; an appropriation of ECU 4,5 million was proposed and it is expected that the EP will endorse these proposals. The Commission has taken action under the abovementioned budget headings by introducing a series of appropriate projects which have been carried out by various organizations. Cooperation with NGOs and charitable associations has frequently been the subject of questions raised by MEPs [see, most recently, the question asked by Mr Iversen MEP (OJ C 60, 26. 2. 1997, p. 101)]. EUROPEAN COMMISSION European Forum on Social Policy, role of NGOs Declaration No 23 first exerted a political influence on the Commission in its medium-term social action programme 1995/97 (COM(95) 134 final). The Commission referred expressly to this declaration when it announced in the action programme the establishment of a European forum on social policy; the Commission argued that non-profit associations, representative organizations and interested parties should be consulted on a large number of social issues. The forum held a meeting — which was not regarded as an unqualified success — in March 1996. This issue of associations and other bodies was also taken up in the report by the ‘Committee of Wise Men’ drawn up for the abovementioned forum in 1996. According to the report it had been shown to be necessary for non-profit bodies and foundations, and more generally bodies representing collective interests working in civil society, to be involved in social policy decision-making. A special place at the table should be reserved for charitable associations which combat social marginalization and poverty and are able to represent unemployed victims of social marginalization (Report, Part V, No 1, Brussels, 1995 — February 1996). In its most recent social policy communication on modernizing and improving social protection in the European Union (COM(97) 102 final), the Commission invites only the social partners, in addition to the EU institutions and Member States, to give further views on this issue; it merely includes NGOs C 73/100 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 3. 98 among participants at the second forum on social policy, due to be held in 1998. The communication makes absolutely no mention of charitable associations and it therefore also fails to recognize their role as independent players in the field of social protection. Social economy, statute of a ‘European association’ The Commission has also addressed a number of issues from a different standpoint, in particular the question of associations. It has proposed draft legal vehicles for cooperatives, mutual associations and other associations — not just associations operating in the social field — which would give such organizations, collectively referred to as the ‘social economy’, a European legal status. These proposals are designed to give recognition to common objectives and practical aspects over and above the different legal articles of the organizations. The articles are to be applied, where possible, under the laws of the Member States. In respect of partnerships established under EU law, the Commission has proposed that provisions be introduced governing transition between the three types of organization (cooperatives, mutual associations and other associations). Adoption of these proposals by the Council is however not yet in prospect, inter alia because of the fact that the proposed Directives concerning works councils in enterprises of this type — submitted at the same time — brought into the frame the controversial debate in the EU on worker participation. In this same context the multi-year programmes submitted by the Commission for the social economy have not yet been endorsed by the Council for various reasons. One of these reasons is the failure to pay adequate attention to the heterogeneous nature of associations in the EU Member States. The Commission has however implemented appropriate measures using the ad hoc funding allocated under the various budgets. An ‘advisory committee’ has also been set up in Brussels by the Commission, comprising representatives of the abovementioned organizations from all EU Member States. On 6 June 1997 the Commission submitted a Communication on enhancing the role of non-profit associations and foundations in Europe (COM(97) 241 final) which referred inter alia to the abovementioned Declaration No 23; this Communication does, however, cover all non-profit organizations (e. g. those operating in the field of sport, culture, etc. ) and, from the content point of view, it draws upon a white paper on associations, etc. made available on an informal basis quite a long time earlier. EUROPEAN COOPERATION BETWEEN CHARITABLE ASSOCIATIONS In 1992 the European Round Table of Charitable Social Welfare Associations — ET Welfare — was set up with specific reference to Declaration No 23; since 1996 this Round Table has operated under the legal form of a non-profit European economic interest association. With the assistance of the Commission, ETWelfare has carried out two pilot projects using funding from the abovementioned budgetary headings. One of the aims of these pilot projects was to improve cooperation between welfare associations through the exchange of staff from associations in all EU Member States. With a view to preparing the forum on social policy in 1996, the NGOs working in the social field set up a ‘platform of social NGOs’; at the final meeting a member of the ESC, Soscha, Countess of Eulenburg, was appointed as the spokeswoman for the platform. A distinction can be drawn between sectoral alliances between organizations and intersectoral, inter-disciplinary alliances. A good example of the former is to be found in the alliances which have been set up in the EU and the Member States to combat poverty and social exclusion (the European network for combating poverty, the European umbrella group for combating homelessness (FEANTSA) and the European disability forum and the European youth forum, bringing together associations representing the groups concerned and the bodies providing services and operating establishments. The role of these alliances is to defend the rights and interests of the victims of particular forms of need, conflict and other difficult situations affecting their lives who have joined forces in associations to tackle these problems. Such a role has by no means ruled out important joint action being taken in individual cases in respect of general social demands. One example which may be quoted here is the Platform of Social NGOs, set up to prepare the 1996 social policy forum and the next forum scheduled for 1998. The aim of both forums is, in particular, to promote dialogue with the two social partners, which requires appropriate cooperation and coordination between the NGOs working in the social field. A distinction should be drawn between the abovementioned organizations and charitable associations and foundations which provide inter-disciplinary social services and facilities. These bodies both provide social welfare services and at the same time defend the social rights of the people concerned (cf. , for example, the European Round Table of Social Welfare Associations — ETWelfare, which currently brings together umbrella associations providing such services and facilities in 14 EU Member States). 9. 3. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 73/101 APPENDIX III to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee The following amendments, which attracted more than 25 % of the votes cast, were rejected during the course of the deliberations: Point 3. 2 Amend to read as follows: ‘Charitable associations constitute an important economic and social group contributing to social solidarity in the individual Member States and at the level of the European Union, whose Member States are becoming ever more closely linked. The ESC is pleased to count representatives of charitable associations amongst its members. The appropriate representation of these bodies means that the broadest representation of civil society is to be found at the ESC, thereby enabling it to embody and give effect to the “civil dialogue”. By exercising this role, on the basis, in particular of its current membership, the ESC is in a position to carry out the tasks with which it has been charged. ’ Reason — For the term ‘social solidarity’ see the reasons in respect of Article 3. 1 above. — Although the proposed amendment would tone down Article 3. 2, as set out in the corrigendum, it would not make substantive changes. The admissions made in the present version of this article represent an extremely dangerous self-inflicted blow to the ESC’s authority, standing and overall credibility of its work and its members. This is because, in its present form, the article takes the line that: — representation is currently not appropriate because charitable associations have to be adequately represented (implying that they are at the present time not appropriately represented!); — because of this inappropriate representation the ESC cannot effectively achieve the desired civil dialogue (cf. point 3. 2 of the corrigendum: ‘the civil dialogue will be achieved yet more effectively if charitable associations are adequately represented at the ESC’). Contrary to the existing Article 3. 2, the proposed amendment endorses the presence at the ESC of representatives of charitable associations, whilst pointing out that, thanks to this presence, the ESC has an appropriate composition, thereby enabling it to represent and give full expression to civil society. Result of the vote For: 36, against: 47, abstentions: 9. Point 3. 3 Delete the last sentence: ‘On the other hand,. in tune with needs. ’ Reason This is an unreasonable claim, as it would be impossible for voluntary charitable associations to take over responsibility for e. g. home help or meals on wheels to the elderly. Result of the vote For: 38, against: 40, abstentions: 13