Presentation by Mr Andris Gobiņš, Rapporteur of the EESC opinion, on the occasion of the EESC hearing on the Europe for Citizens programme 2014-2020 (Brussels, 3 May 2012)

1. Europe for Citizens 2014-2020
Background information for discussion
EESC Hearing, Brussels, 05.03.2012
____
SOC/458 – Opinion of the European Econmic and Social Committee
on COM(2011) 884 final – 2011/0436 (APP)
Andris Gobiņš
Rapporteur, Member of the EESC, Group III
President of the European Movement - Latvia

2. Content
1. Basic info and timetable
2. Working methods
3. EC aims
4. EESC opinion ideas
5. Detailed comments

3. 1.1. People in charge
President Gintaras Morkis, EESC Group 1
Draft document prepared by :
Andris Gobins (Rapporteur)
andris.gobins@eesc.europa.eu, gobins@web.de
Diana Potjomkina (Expert)
info@eiropaskustiba.lv

4. 1.2. Draft timetable
1. 20 April – EESC Liaison Group
2. 3 May – Hearing and 1st Study group
3. 29 May – 1st study group
4. 27 June – Section
5. 11, 12 July – Plenary Session
7. 10 May – Debate/examination by Council
8. EP draft report in July
9. 09 October – EP CULT 1st/single reading

5. 2. Working methods: transparency and
involvement
1. Interaction with CSOs and other partners
2. Invitation to participate in Study Group
meetings
3. Public hearing and its video,
4. Feeding in via Expert or Rapporteur and
others
5. Exchange with CSOs, members of EESC,
MEPs and employees of the EC, to get the
best possible quality and impact

6. 3.1. EC aims
The programme consists of two strands:
1 "Remembrance and European citizenship"
2 "Democratic engagement and civic
participation"
(3) Valorisation actions
Actions, implemented on a transnational level
or with a clear European dimension

7. 3.2. Objectives I
• Citizens' meetings, town-twinning
• Creation and operations of transnational
partnerships and networks
• Support for organisations of a general
European interest
• Community building and debates on citizenship
issues based on the use of ICT and/or social
media
• Union level events
• Debates/studies and interventions on defining
moments in European history, in particular to
keep the memory alive of the crimes
committed under Nazism and Stalinism

8. 3.3. Objectives II
• Reflection/debates on common values
• Initiatives to raise awareness on the EU
institutions and their functioning
• Actions that exploit and further valorise the
results of the supported initiatives
• Studies on issues related to citizenship and
civic participation
• Support to programme information/advice
structures in the Member States

9. 4.1. Ideas for EESC opinion I
1.1 strong support for programme and aim
1.2. recommendations and amendments for further
improvements – with aim: closer to citizens
1.3 EU institutions, all levels involved have
difficulties with legitimacy (including national,
regional, local)
1.4 Articles 10 and 11 are keys, ECI only one step
1.5 A package of EU homework necessary in parallel
1.6 Links with other programmes good – though
lacks links to ENP and others

10. 4.2 Ideas for EESC opinion II
1.7 vertical dialogue & horizontal dialogue needed
1.8 sustainable, meaningful and structured
opportunities and funding, especially at EU and
national level
1.9 widening of remembrance part is good – special
focus on nazi and totalitarian communism up till
European reunification
1.10 high importance of annual action programmes
– risks for long term goals
1.11 Involvement of EESC and (!) Committee of
Regions representatives & structural dialogue
partners in steering committee
1.12 two-stage project evaluation system needed

11. 4.3. Ideas for EESC opinion III
2.1 Long list of articles to be mentioned
somewhere: LES 10, 11. 15, CoFR: 39, 11
(freedom of speech and freedom of information),
12 (freedom of assembly and freedom of
association), the 41 (right to good
administration), 20. to 26. legal defense, and
others.
2.2 National (and local?) level has to be kept in
mind and funded as well –if EU related project –
no demand of partners for them
2.3 administrative grants incl. for "watchdog"
organizations

12. 4.4. Ideas for EESC opinion II
2.4. widening of rememberance is good
2.5 The "Town twinning" involving the public, not
just the officials. Special support for new
partnerships, particularly East-West.
2.6 EY 2013 results to be continued
2.7 Links to ENP and development necessary,
overlaps with others to avoid
2.8 coordinated information needed
2.9 coordination between the various European
Commission Directorates-General

13. 5.1. Detailed comments I
Financial aspects
3.1 shifts from other programmes if not used there
3.2 against discrimination of smaller and poorer
organizations – minimum amounts and co-
financing, amount of partners, EU issues in the
centre, administrative burden, EUR 80 000 as
average project for participation projects,
3.3 Special support for less supportive member
state civil society
3.4 eligibility of volunteer work as co-financing.
3.5 inclusion of former JiA Youth Initiative projects

14. 5.2. Detailed comments II
Programme management and administration
3.6 decentralized administration for smallest
projects
3.7 CoR, EESC & structured dialogue partners in
programme steering committee
3.8 reducing the role of annual action programme,
short-term and campaign type events
3.9 civil society to determine own annual priorities
3.10 two phase project evaluation system needed
(resistance from Agency)
3.11 Reduce agency costs (now about 11%)
3.12 focal points in all programme countries needed

15. 5.3. Detailed comments III
Efficiency, sustainability and return on investment
of resources
3.13 long term and sustainable results are
necessary
3.14 legislative impact should be envisaged (to get
LES 11 alive a.o.m.)
3.15 Increased operational grants, focusing on EU
and national level (ensuring institutional
memory, quality etc.) & lower minimum amount
or longer period
3.16 more funds to avoid disappointment&be
contra-productive.

16. Thank you!
Looking forward for a close and fruitful
cooperation.
Diāna Potjomkina (Expert)
info@eiropaskustiba.lv
Andris Gobiņš (Rapporteur)
andris.gobins@eesc.europa.eu, gobins@web.de