Strategic planning and control cycle 2007-2010) for Eureau

EU0-SEC-060522-01
Eureau / SPCC (version 2.6) Page 1 of 29 09 June 2006
EUREAU STRATEGIC PLANNING AND CONTROL CYCLE
1st
edition – period 2006-2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction 3
2. Mission of Eureau 3
3. Benefits of being a Eureau member 4
4. Driving forces 4
4.1 Eureau as a European stakeholder 4
4.2 Eureau as water operators representative 5
5. SWOT 6
6. Vision for Eureau in 2010 6
7. Corporate values 7
8. Getting the structure right 8
9. Getting the process right 10
9.1 Achieving the right focus on limited number of addressees 10
9.2 Defining the outputs at the start 10
9.3 Members’ participation (NMS) 11
9.4 Communication capability 12
9.5 Capacity to produce facts and evidences 12
10. Enabling factors 13
10.1 Composition of Eureau commissions. 13
10.2 Taking advantage of synergies with other water operators networks 14
10.3 "On-line" collaboration 14
10.4 Eureau secretariat capability 15
11. Catalog of actions over 2007-2010 15
11.1 Administration / management 15
11.2 Strengthening the Eureau – members relationship 16
11.3 Policy making activities 16
11.4 Communication & lobbying 16

EU0-SEC-060522-01
12. Financial strategy 17
12.1 Description of the needs 17
12.2 Presentation of the scenarios 17
12.3 Key parameters for computing scenarios 19
12.4 Explanation of the costs’ structure 19
Annex 1 : Mechanism for gradual increase of NMS membership fees 25
Annex 2 : Budget for an alternative housing 26
Annex 3 : Comparison of Eureau with other European stakeholders associations 27
Annex 4 : Projected tasks allocation amongst Eureau staff members 29

EU0-SEC-060522-01
1. INTRODUCTION
Even if Eureau was founded 30 years ago it is stepping for the first time into a Strategic
Planning and Control Process - SPCC. Intensive discussions started 2 years ago and have
successively considered the role of President and Secretary General, the scope of Commission
activities, communication needs, frustrations with standardization, and integrated river basin
management approach. Finally, the Board arrived to the conclusion that all these needs and
others must be addressed via a SPCC including 3 components:
- a 4-year strategic vision for Eureau (the present document) ,
- work planning and reporting scheme for Commissions,
- a yearly Eureau business plan covering the budget and organizational aspects.
This approach also reflects steady changes concerning the perception by water services
operators of their role within the water management processes. Traditionally water services
operators have considered themselves as an utility sector whose mission is the “Provision of
reliable and high quality water supply and waste water services which …” (as agreed on the
25th
anniversary of Eureau). Today, however, water operators cannot work anymore in
convenient isolation. They are called for taking a more prominent role vis-à-vis the society
that goes beyond the provision of water services and proves to be valuable for the whole
protection of water resources.
- They are responsible for operating an infrastructure, which is actually a major control lever
to act on the state of water resources. This infrastructure is a result of long-term investment
in expensive assets and can be only used in the way it was designed for. Operators mustn’t
go blind. It is up to them to stimulate other stakeholders in order to take initiatives and
shape the local context within the framework of integrated river basin management.
- They are the only water actors at the front contact with end-users who generally pay a
lump sum for different water services (at least a part of the costs). Till now, water has been
considered as a cheap and abundant commodity which end-users have taken for granted.
Additional investments requested under the WFD and other legislations (i.e. DWD) will
significantly raise the price of water services. Then, operators will have a moral obligation
that the money they collect will really serve the purpose.
The above in conjunction with the evolution of the European arena makes it a perfect time for
Eureau to take up a leading role in shaping EU future actions on the water services sector
2. MISSION OF EUREAU
Eureau's mission is:
- to promote the common interests of the European water service sector to the EU
institutions and stakeholders;
- to enable its members to adequately deal with treats and opportunities arising from EU
policy and its national implementation;

EU0-SEC-060522-01
- to support members’ networking.
3. BENEFITS OF BEING A EUREAU MEMBER
¾ Influencing EU legislation: environmental and public health directives have proved to be
major cost drivers and also a major tool for the protection of water resources. EU measures on
chemicals control also have a huge direct impact on the water operators’ activities. In
addition, competition and Internal Market regulations directly impact the structure of the
water services sector. It is the interest of water operators to reflect their concerns at the
earliest stage in order to avoid unworkable requirements and disproportionate investments.
¾ Enlarging the business vision: Eureau is also an appropriate forum for members to exchange
ideas and to compare national situations. It can lead members to elaborate initiatives and to
submit these for support to EU and national authorities.
¾ Being part of a community of water operators: Speaking in one voice is not only important
at EU level but also at national level where Eureau positions are usually seen as strong
references. As the water services sector is probably one of most heterogeneous at EU level,
the consensus’ value may be even higher.
¾ Building an image of the sector: Policy-makers and stakeholders are not fully aware of
water operators’ know-how and long-term planned investment in expensive assets
as these are mostly underground or not prominently sited. Eureau helps them to
understand the complexity and values of the water services.
4. DRIVING FORCES
4.1 Eureau as a European stakeholder
¾ Construction of EU: This has been a continuous process since the 1950s. For the future, EU
role is likely to remain high on environmental and public health issues but of different nature
(more subsidiarity, more integrated). The EU competences also touch to the institutional
management of water services: some needs clarification (in-house, PPP); some will probably
be laid down in the next treaty (services of general interest).
¾ European Parliament: Its recent growth of power (i.e. co-decision) requires specific
lobbying approach and additional (communication) abilities than the EC Commission or
Council lobbying.
¾ EU Agenda: The Lisbon Strategy has pointed out the contribution of services to the EU
economy and is paying great attention to the performance of the sector. Early thinking about
possible EU measures can be found in EC Commission programme 2004-09, better regulation
initiative, etc.
¾ EU Governance: European Institutions recognize the benefits of being open and
consultation mechanisms form part of their activities throughout the whole legislative
process. Stakeholders' input to support EU policy-making on complex issues is therefore of

EU0-SEC-060522-01
prime importance for the Commission to complete and to cross-check what it gets from
Member States.
¾ Enlargement: June 2004 was a historic event but still the EU institutions and stakeholders
are terribly missing contacts with civil society in NMS. A lot of efforts must be invested to
get them to get used to EU consultation processes and to understand the benefits of it.
=> Stakeholders must expand their working capacity to cope with EU developments.
4.2 Eureau as water operators representative
¾ The WFD challenge: it is often viewed as one of the most advanced environmental
regulation as it fixes clear objectives and brings together a wide panel of new instruments. It
has totally changed the scene and there is still a lot to learn about the effective
implementation. Water operators have a first role to play and may face significant investments
in many cases.
¾ Increased social and political demand: Even if primary responsibility of organizing water
services will probably remain with local / regional authorities, the water services sector has to
respond to EP call for modernization in the sense that it must demonstrate efficiency and
contribute to better competitiveness of European economy (i.e. Lisbon Strategy). Some form
of (indirect) competition is likely to be introduced.
¾ State of resources / new risks: The role and responsibility of water operators will probably
evolve in the future in the sense that
- They will play a more crucial role to protect public health and environment
- They will operate under tighter circumstances
¾ Towards sustainable development: The water environment has emergent properties that, by
nature, are unpredictable. Operators have to adapt to (rapidly?) changing situations, which
cannot be simply extrapolated from the present. As there are only few possibilities to adapt
the infrastructure, it is of crucial importance for water operators to engage in partnerships to
ensure the quality of services. This should be supported by appropriate legislation
=> EU institutions will pay more attention to the water services in the next future.

EU0-SEC-060522-01
5. SWOT
Eureau as the EU voice of European water operators
Strengths
− A unique concentration of technical, scientific
and management knowledge
− A fair coverage of the European diversity
− Practitioners in direct contact with EC officials
− A successful track record of 30 years with the
Commission (DG Environment)
− Existing networks which water operators take
part in
Weaknesses
− No image of the sector in Brussels
− Imbalance between the capacity of the different
components (analysis, policy shaping,
management, communication …)
− Slow moving and segmented organization
− Lack of continuity in the leadership
− Lack of central support
− Variable degree of participation of members in
Eureau activities
− Costs of attending Eureau meetings
Opportunities
− A new spin in EU25
− Sustainable development driver
− Expending EU competencies (i.e. security)
− Importance of services in EU economy
− Increased reliance of EU institutions on major
stakeholders
Threats
− Overregulation
− Unrealistic expectations
− New risks on the delivery of water services
− Sector being not properly understood
− Eureau being left aside of consultation
− Competition / duplication of efforts inside the
“water family” network
6. VISION FOR EUREAU IN 2010
Eureau will have moved away from a defensive position and will maintain a strong presence
in Brussels, reflecting on the EU scene the new impetus prompting the water services sector
across Europe however the local context and management scheme may vary.
Eureau will be established in EU circles as the focal point and will be regarded by members
and EU institutions as the spokesman of water operators in charge of:
- conveying key common messages from all water operators,
- providing authoritative analysis on water issues (not only on services),
- showing water service sector’s commitment to contribute in most cost-effective way to the
protection of water resources and the well-being of the society,
- enabling the EU decision-makers to make well-informed choice and to assess the overall
impact of it.

EU0-SEC-060522-01
Internally, Eureau will have been reorganised into a proactive stakeholder capable of:
- anticipating (and influence) the EU agenda
- working efficiently with several networks (national, international river basin and regional
seas, professional think tanks, research),
- making prompt agreements on internal priorities and positions
- bringing up its concerns to the attention of the EU institutions
- elaborating joint proposals with other concerned stakeholders
- running advocacy campaign for its positions all over the EU policy-making process
- demonstrating its claims by providing facts and evidences
7. CORPORATE VALUES
¾ Innovation: Eureau recognizes that there is long way to go and a lot to be learned before
reaching the WFD objectives. Integrated river basin management requires a lot of new
innovative developments (management methodologies, technologies and additional services).
Eureau is committed to provide an interactive platform in order to exchange views and
stimulate the emergence of solutions.
¾ EU added value: Eureau firmly believes in the benefits for the water services sector of taking
actions at EU level (i.e. transboundary basin, industry permitting, marketing hazardous
substances, cohesion fund for infrastructure investments in NMS …) and adapting these to the
local context according to the subsidiarity principle.
Eureau is committed to be a reliable partner for EU institutions, to adapt to an evolving
arena and to endow CEC officials with direct access to national members and water
companies.
¾ Scientific approach: Eureau believes that EU policy design must be supported by valid
methodologies (i.e. impact assessment) as well as by the best available scientific and technical
evidences.
Eureau is committed to deliver excellent expertise by appointing senior practitioners with
field experience and access to data.
¾ Engaging the dialogue with other stakeholders: The traditional regulatory approach cannot
fulfil all the tasks and must be completed by partnership-based tools (i.e. river basin plan) that
are less costly to implement and more adaptable to local context. As these require support and
commitment from all stakeholders, dialogue is absolutely critical for the achievement of an
effective product in the decision.
Eureau is committed to be transparent to third parties and to feed open and constructive
dialogues with other European stakeholders.

EU0-SEC-060522-01
8. GETTING THE STRUCTURE RIGHT
The SPCC has reviewed the existing allocation of tasks and responsibilities within Eureau and
has pointed out some needs for adapting these to the evaluation of the European context and
Eureau’s activities. Key proposals are outlined below and a detailed chart on the allocation of
tasks and responsibilities is presented at the next page.
¾ Eureau’s management: previous amendment to the management structure dates from 2001.
Additional amendment is proposed taking into account the lessons we have learned since then
and the need for Eureau to be more proactive and to assure the continuity of management as
well as the necessity to keep the balance right between the diversity of interests it represents.
- To maintain the current 1-year mandate duration and rota system for appointing the vice-
president and president but to take back the past-president into the management structure
in order to ensure continuity.
- To transform the Steering committee into the Executive Committee chaired by the
President. The EXCOM will take care of short-term management, including internal
coordination, supervision of commissions’ activities and external communication. In
parallel, the Board remits will be refocused on strategic direction and policy.
- Coopted members will self-nominate on the basis of the competencies that the incoming
president will have identified as critical for the implementation of his business plan. Then,
they will be appointed by the Board for one-year term.
- To organize more frequent meetings of the Executive Committee. It will be the privileged
moment for the consultation so that Eureau decisions can be made in full transparency.
The agenda will be sent to all Board members. The President will have discretionary
power to invite any outsider whose expertise may be helpful to the debate.
¾ Steering up / coordination: Before collecting the expertise of Commission members, some
preparatory analysis is necessary to explore the issues at stake, to point out the key points of
concerns and to elaborate scenarios for the future. Bringing together the “key Eureau
contributors” will help to steer up the association and to boost cross exchanges. These
contributors are executive committee members, chairmen, working group leaders,
representatives in the EU committee. All are already very active in Eureau (sometimes for a
long time) and often present in Brussels. Bridging them will improve Eureau’s coordination
and effectiveness and will stimulate innovative thinking on how to respond to the challenges
we are facing.
Therefore it is proposed to set up “Think Tank” bringing together key contributors and,
possibly, EU officials and external experts. It will be chaired by the President with the
assistance of Eureau secretariat. It will work in flexible way using as much as possible by
electronic tools. It will have one or two plenary meetings a year in Brussels.

EU0-SEC-060522-01
TASKS’ allocation
Board
/
GA
Executive
committee
Secretariat
Think
Tank
Chairmen
WG
leaders
Commissions
Members
Others
POLICY IDENTIFICATION: what issues do we need to address?
− Comparing EU agenda and the sector’s views • • • • • • •
− Collecting the information • • •
− Alerting Eureau experts •
− Contacting CEC administrators(and stakeholders) • •
− Assessing the relevance of the issues • • •
− Determining priorities •
POLICY DEVELOPMENT: what do we want to say about these issues?
− Assessing the impacts on the water operators • • • •
− Data collection • • •
− Coordinating the different points of views • •
− Building scenarios and amended proposals •
− Elaborate a “technical” position • •
POLICY DELIVERY: how are we going to influence the decision-makers?
− Participation in comitology • •
− Dissemination of policy papers • • •
− Lobbying the Commission • •
− Lobbying the EP and the Council • • •
− Assessing national issues • •
MANAGEMENT
− Preparing yearly business plan • •
− Piloting the network / appointing representatives •
− Organizing the participation of the think-tank • •
− Set up and coordinate ad-hoc groups on specific issues • •
− Managing the external communication • •
− Supervising secretariat’s activities •
− Authorizing expenses •
− Setting up the working rules •
− Authorizing stakeholders alliances •
− Approving and supervising Eureau strategic plans •
− Endorsing Eureau positions •
− Approving the budget •
SUPPORT
− Centralizing requests and demand of contacts •
− Ensuring internal communication •
− Maintaining a control panel on Eureau’s activities •
− Managing the Eureau documents •
− Editing the website and communication material •

EU0-SEC-060522-01
¾ Capacity of the Secretariat: Its main tasks have till now been focussed on the administration
of Eureau and the liaison with EU institutions. This will remain a major responsibility of
Eureau secretariat in the future but additional support will be increasingly need to assist
Eureau experts in delivering well supported opinions targeted on specific audiences and in
phase with the context .
Additional workforce will be made available for the secretariat by hiring new staff members
and/or outsourcing some of these tasks. Appropriate training of secretariat staff (i.e.
communication) will be ensured.
9. GETTING THE PROCESS RIGHT
9.1 Achieving the right focus on limited number of addressees
Eureau needs to achieve the right focus on topics that really matter for the sector and for
which we have a chance to influence. We are faced with the problem of how to balance a
manageable number of interests against increasing requests for participation to stakeholders
groups and consultation.
Therefore it is proposed to set up criteria to assess the relevance of new issues:
- How much is it a common issue for all water operators across Eureau?
- How important are the issues at stake for the water operator? What is the impact?
- How is it (or could it be) linked to the EU policy and national implementation?
- Do we have a reasonable chance to influence the case?
- Is Eureau the appropriate channel to convey members’ concerns?
Lobbying, however, is a two-player game on which Eureau has little command. Therefore it is
of critical importance for Eureau:
- To remain flexible and agile enough to respond to unexpected developments
- To be capable of detecting weak signals on emerging issues before they are included on the
political agenda.
9.2 Defining the outputs at the start
When addressing an issue, Eureau will elaborate its strategy at the start and will consider the
following points:
- What resources can Eureau network provide?
- Status of Eureau position (a discussion paper, briefing note for internal use by members,
technical paper for the Commission, a policy paper for EP and council, a press release)
- What kind of facts and evidences does it need to support its position and demonstrate its
claims? Are these available? If not can we organise access?
- What are the positions of other actors? What type of arguments are we likely to face?
- Is there any other concerned stakeholders? Is it worth to joint forces?

EU0-SEC-060522-01
In the future, Eureau will remain a consensus-based organisation despite of the increasing
number of members and the extension of topics covered by EU competencies. Voting is
definitively not an alternative.
In case no consensus can be reached or is so much watered down that it becomes meaningless,
a way out may be found by:
- tuning the status of Eureau position according to the level of internal consensus
- paying more attention to explain the sector’s diversity.
9.3 Members’ participation (NMS)
Eureau is just nothing without the active support of its members. To be in position to fulfil
such a commitment, national members should have built a well-established position and have
developed an excellent capability in dealing with water issues.
Accession of 10 NMS in June 2004 requested Eureau to put a lot of efforts for engaging NMS
associations in its activities. Raising their awareness about the impact of EU policy and the
need to take part in shaping it is not enough. Eureau must also reverse its thinking and
understand the situation of water operators in NMS. Long term regulatory issues cannot be
the first priority. The sector has generally gone through deep structural reform in the
aftermath of the fall of the communist regimes, and the whole EU "acquis" has been
transposed at once into national law. Even though progress has been made in the
implementation of "acquis" during the pre-accession period, there is still a lot more to do. In
many cases, EU has granted transition periods of the so-called "heavy investment directives"
for which funding is the crucial point1
.
In many NMS, national associations have been newly established or are still missing. Most of
them still have to put a lot of efforts in order to establish a strong position and develop
capacity with EU policy. In addition, they have limited financial resources for internal
network but this should not be excuse if Eureau can bring real value to them.
With NMS water operators associations, Eureau must act in two ways:
- Bring them in direct contact with the Commission and enable them to advocate their
specific concerns on EU directives and the adoption of new water legislation
- Assist NMS water operators associations to establish themselves a key partner for the
national water authorities when implementing EU directives.
As it happened before with previous new EU members, it will probably take years to
complete the integration of NMS associations into the Eureau network. It should be made
clear that this is not Eureau’s job only. National members have an important role to play in
1
According to the Commission, NMS will have to spend on average between 2% and 3% of GDP in the coming years to
implement the environmental directives. Current expenditure is generally well below this target.

EU0-SEC-060522-01
this context by assisting each other and sharing their know-how on how to influence national
water policy.
9.4 Communication capability
Eureau is an organization of technical and professional people whose members are respected
for their expertise. The main focus of our work has been to respond to the European
Commission’s initiatives, usually by producing well argued technical papers and written
responses to consultations. However, Eureau rarely, if ever, plans a coordinated
communication campaign for any of its policies
It is accepted that Eureau has a good working relationship with the Commission and that this
is being built on and expanded but, in parallel, it also has to develop and maintain improved
working relationships with other European Institutions (i.e. European Parliament), and other
European stakeholders with whom we can build alliances and increase our legitimacy.
Reaching this objective requires Eureau to acquire a complete set of communication skills and
support material.
In February 2004, the Board acknowledged the communication deficit, which makes Eureau
less efficient and effective than it could be with the deployment of communication skills.
With a few exceptions, these skills are not to be found on Eureau's Board or in its
Commissions. Therefore the Board decided to set up the “Communication Network”.
This experience has revealed the wide range of Eureau communication needs and pointed out
the next steps for Eureau to make further progress.
- To elaborate a communication strategy, including a stakeholders mapping
- To build a central capacity located at the secretariat.
The links between communication and information resources should be stressed. Just as the
equilibrium price in goods market is reached by the interplay of supply and demand, the
equilibrium level of influence is highly determined by the supply and demand of information.
9.5 Capacity to produce facts and evidences
Generally speaking, the water services sector is badly documented at European level probably
because it is highly fragmented and heterogeneous. This lack of data, however, was the major
reason why in recent years the Commission, DG MARK and DG COM, were so confused
about the sector and elaborated totally unrealistic proposals for water liberalization. This
situation can also induce suspicion on the sector which may appear as not willing to be
transparent or as not mastering the quality of its performance.

EU0-SEC-060522-01
As it concerns environmental legislation, any proposal is submitted to an impact assessment
which will consider the cost effectiveness of proposed measures. This is a key criteria in
decision-making process and that everything without a Euro behind it tends to be pushed out
of the equation. To win its cases, Eureau must be able to demonstrate the economic aspects.
This is contrasting with the national initiatives that have started due to regulatory
requirements, benchmarking exercise or other purposes (i.e. river basin management).
However, this information is often context specific and cannot be easily transposed at EU
level or used for comparison.
Eureau must find the right balance: on one hand it acknowledges the need of having its
position supported by facts and evidences that demonstrate its legitimacy as the voice of the
water operators and the relevance of its claims and, on the other hand, it knows from previous
surveys2
the huge amount of work this requires. In addition, Eureau members must avoid the
pitfall of transmitting any information which could be directly used for identifying any lack of
compliance in Member States with EU directives.
Next steps to progress on this issue are:
- To review what its information needs exactly are taking into account the outcomes of its
communication strategy
- To check what initiatives are going on (or is projected) at national and river basin level and
what were the benefits for water operators
- To investigate the possibilities of joining forces and sharing the burden with other water
stakeholders
- To test the possibilities of organising the collect of information from members and other
networks and processing it in a central place.
10. ENABLING FACTORS
10.1 Composition of Eureau commissions.
Eureau commissions bring together a wide range of water people with different functions
(technical experts, managers, and lobbyists) and different backgrounds (private/public,
drinking/waste water, geography). Each profile brings in different input and has different
expectations on the kind of reward they hope to get from their contribution to Eureau
A key challenge for Eureau is to attract knowledgeable experts
- whose competencies cover the whole diversity of water services interest
2
"Management of Systems of Drinking Water Production and Distribution Services in the EU Member States in 1996" and the
"European Waste Water Catalog 1997"

EU0-SEC-060522-01
- who are representative of the diversity of situations across Europe
- who can save time resources to contribute to Eureau’s activities
- who can cope with a flexible agenda
and to ensure them a satisfactory return (access to information, knowledge sharing, support to
their daily activities …).
For new commission members, an induction programme (visit of EU institutions, explanation
of EU processes, presentation of Eureau, introduction to working rules and electronic tools,
etc.) will be organized in order to facilitate their participation.
10.2 Taking advantage of synergies with other water operators networks
Apart from Eureau, water operators are also represented in other networks corresponding to
different geographical or business context. These are aimed to
- to promote the interests of water operators at river basin or regional sea level (RIWA3
,
IAWR4
, IAWD5
, OSPAR, Helsinki Convention …)
- to aim at supporting the professional know-how and expertise amongst water operators
(IWA6
, EWA7
)
- to represent specific trends in Eureau’s membership (CEEP8
, AQUAFED9
)
- to represent broader business interests than water services (UNICE10
)
In order to prevent any duplication of efforts (or, even worse, competition), Eureau will try
formalise its relationship with these networks and, if relevant, will sign up memorandum of
collaboration.
10.3 "On-line" collaboration
A central computing tool should be developed as a sort of entrance door to Eureau's activities
and as a platform for decentralised collaboration. It will be aimed to
- Disseminate news (see newsletter),
- Get details on all Eureau actors (list of commission members ...),
- Support work group activities (background paper, brainstorming session),
- Release questionnaires, collect and process data in order to produce facts and evidences,
- Reporting on Eureau activities (see issue tracker),
- Archiving minutes, position papers, EU law ... (see extranet).
3
Association of River Water Companies divided in 3 sections: Rhine, Maas and Schelde
4
Internationale Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wasserwerke im Rheineinzugsgebiet.
5
International Association for Water Works in the Danube Basin
6
International Water Association
7
European Water Association
8
European Centre of Enterprises with Public Participation and of Enterprises of General Economic Interest
9
International Federation of Private Water Operators
10
European Union of Business Federation

EU0-SEC-060522-01
Such a tool must respond to the need of prolonging the exchanges amongst Eureau actors
between the plenary meetings and also enabling people who cannot attend to contribute
notwithstanding. Building this tool will have to be carried out gradually on the basis of
experience and users’ feedback. It will be administrated by Eureau secretariat.
10.4 Eureau secretariat capability
Eureau contributors must be able to concentrate on the areas where their involvement brings
real added value. In order to facilitate their engagement, central capacity must be available
from Eureau secretariat in order to provide specialised assistance for:
- facilitating Eureau meetings (brainstorming tools, visualisation tools)
- scrutinising the EU scene
- Document management
- Data collect and processing
- Communication (website, writing)
In this context, Eureau will decide on the tasks for which it wants in-house capacity and those
that can be outsourced to consultants.
11. CATALOG OF ACTIONS OVER 2007-2010
The table at the next page present a catalogue of actions that are submitted for consideration
during the period 2007-2010 according to the 4 major axes defined for this SPCC.
11.1 Administration / management
- Revise the Eureau constitution in order to enforce the modifications to the structure
- Rewrite the working rules in order to make sure that :
- the allocation of tasks and duties fits into the vision
- procedures are transparent to any potential contributor
- Organize an induction programme in Brussels for new Commission members
- Develop a working relationship with other water bodies and, if necessary, elaborate a
memorandum of collaboration with other water organisation
- Check Eureau’s legal, accounting and financial management in response to the new
Belgian law
- Develop a central, uniform and “real time’ procedure for planning and reporting on the
Eureau Commissions activities
- Elaborate a performance indicators scheme
- Develop an central electronic platform (see point 10.3)
- Upgrade the infrastructure of Eureau secretariat

EU0-SEC-060522-01
11.2 Strengthening the Eureau – members relationship
- Elaborate and implement an action programme to ensure regular contacts with national
members in order to review with them the water issues at stake in their countries, how
these interplay with EU policy and how other members deal with similar issue. Priority
will be given to NMS association. A Eureau delegation will be appointed and will visit
them.
- Promote cross-collaboration amongst members to organise national events on EU water
policy. Facilitate the participation of Eureau experts not only in order to contribute but also
to improve their understanding on the issues
- To encourage Eureau members to engage in twinning project with NMS associations on a
bilateral basis. Possibilities of getting external funding will be investigated both from the
EU (LIFE) and national budget,
11.3 Policy making activities
- Step into the production of facts & figures that can be “extracted” from national statistics
available from Eureau members
- Enhance the capacity of Eureau secretariat and other water lobbyists in Brussels to
scrutinize the EU scene and to point out needs for involvement
- Inventory of Eureau key contributors
- Checking that they get the kind of reward they are looking for.
- Checking that the Think Tank brings together all skills that may be needed
- Provide support assistance to the Executive Committee and Think Tank
- Characterise the profile of each Eureau actors according to its interests and expertise
- Expand the Eureau network beyond the Commission members to leverage the whole
expertise available from members.
- Get Eureau involved in the impact assessment required for new legislative proposal as
described in Commission’s communication COM(2002) 276
- Reconsider Eureau’s approach towards standardisation
- Boost the productivity of Eureau Commissions meetings by using brainstorming tools
11.4 Communication & lobbying
- Elaborate a general communication strategy (including a stakeholder mapping)
- Edit communication material (corporate brochure, annual report …)
- Encourage members of the executive committee to organize high-level contacts with the
Commission, EP and other stakeholders
- Encourage Eureau experts to participate to international conference
- Develop a working relation with the press in coordination with members
- Use the website as a major communication tool

EU0-SEC-060522-01
12. FINANCIAL STRATEGY
12.1 Description of the needs
From previous sections, it comes out very clearly that there is a need to strengthen the
capacity of Eureau secretariat. This is particularly true in the field of communication, which is
appearing as a top priority for Eureau is the next future. At the time being, there is no capacity
at all in the secretariat and it will have to be built from scratch. The most direct and efficient
response for Eureau is to hire an additional staff member for the secretariat with knowledge
and expertise in this field. Annex 4 presents the projected tasks allocation amongst Eureau
staff members in case a communication team will join the team. As a second choice, it is also
possible for Eureau to hire external contractors.
Internship is a general practise in the European representative bodies. For Eureau secretariat,
this appears as an attractive solution to increase its workforce in a flexible way according to
the EU political agenda and the annual business plans. It is intended that trainees will work on
well-defined topics that will be agreed with the national members, the president, the
concerned chairmen and the secretary-general. In the recent past, the secretariat has received
several requests from members.
During the preparation of the present document, attention has been given to the location of
Eureau secretariat premises. Current housing is not fully satisfactory in term of image of
Eureau, proximity to the EU institutions and access by public transport. If both the staff of
Eureau secretariat and national liaison offices is growing, the question arises whether it makes
sense to expand in the existing building or to move to downtown. Budget for an alternative
location is presented in the annexes. However, this does not appear to be a priority in
comparison with the needs to strengthen the working capacity of the secretariat. In other hand,
Belgaqua which Eureau has got a subcontracting tenancy from is not interested to move. The
contract will expire in February 2011.
12.2 Presentation of the scenarios
The strengthening of the secretariat capacity is essentially a matter of resources, which are
allocated by member associations. Different scenarios were elaborated and reviewed: some
were discarded because the increase of resources was to slow to higher additional staff
members for the secretariat, others because they were based on a sharp increase of
membership fees, which is unacceptable by a majority of members. Consequently two
scenarios providing for both gradual increase of membership fees and increasing the working
capacity of the secretariat have been selected and are compared hereafter.
- Scenario A provides for a uniform increase of 10 % over the period 2007-2010
- Scenario B provides for a 20% increase in 2007, 10% in 2008 and 2009, 5 % in 2010

EU0-SEC-060522-01
The table below compares the incomes generated by the two scenarios and the additional
resources that are made available in comparison with a baseline scenario taking into the
“natural” growth of expenses due to inflation and yearly wages increase (see table 1).
Scenario A – 10 / 10 / 10 / 10 Scenario B – 20 / 10 / 10 / 5
Year Baseline
Expenses Increase budget additional Increase budget additional
2006 354.800 € 5 % 354.800 € 0 € 5 % 354.800 € 0 €
2007 367.059 € 10 % 394.048 € 26.989 € 20 % 429.328 € 62.269 €
2008 379.771 € 10 % 440.323 € 60.552 € 10 % 480.170 € 100.399 €
2009 392.954 € 10 % 484.155 € 91.200 € 10 % 527.987 € 135.033 €
2010 406.627 € 10 % 532.370 € 125.743 € 5 % 554.286 € 147.659 €
While the scenarios are addressing exactly the same needs, the table below compares the
outcomes and timetables.
Scenario A – 10 / 10 / 10 / 10 Scenario B – 20 / 10 / 10/ 5
Final budget growth 150 % 156 %
Communication
officer
would start mid 2008 would start mid 2007
Internship 1 trainee in 2010 1st
trainee in 2009
2nd
trainee in 2010
Housing Current location Current location
(possibility to earmark resources in
2010 for moving the office in
February 2011 at the end of the
contract with Belgaqua)
Details on the incomes and expenses are presented in table 2 and 3 for scenario A and in table
4 and 5 for scenario B. Explanations on key parameters and costs structure are given at the
next passage. In the “expenses” tables, increases that are not dues to inflation or yearly wages
increase are marked as underlined.
Contingency money may be allocated for contracting external assistance or implementing IT
tools or be kept as reserve money for future investment. This will be decided by the EXCOM.

EU0-SEC-060522-01
12.3 Key parameters for computing scenarios
EXPENSES
− Contractual wages increase per year 2 % Impact on “111- Wages” and “112-Wages (extra)”
− Annual inflation rate11
2 % Impact on all expenses
REVENUES
− Membership fees are calculated according to a ranking system establishing different categories taking into
account the population and GDP of each country (last update in June 2004). There is no mechanism to
compensate inflation but a increase of 5 % on all membership fees was decided onward year 2006.
− A phasing-in mechanism was adopted by the Board in Berlin. It concerns Poland (now in “6.000 €” category)
and Czech Republic (now in the “3.000 €” category). Both will move to the upper category in 2008.
12.4 Explanation of the costs’ structure
TOPIC COMMENT AMOUNT BUDGET LINES
Communication
officer
Full-time 62.500 € / year
7.500 € / year
2.500 € / year
2.500 € / year
2.500 € / year
2.500 € / year
80.000 € / year
111-Wages
112-Wages (extra)
113-Travel (hotel)
114-Travel (flight)
116-Office (operations)
212-Board representation
Internship Per-diem 15.000 € / year
5.000 € / year
20.000 € / year
111-Wages
116-Office (operations)
Existing location (for one
additional worker)
+ 5.000 € / year12
5.000 €13
117-Renting
121-Equipment
Housing
New location: see calculations at annex 2
External assistance This cover various needs:
communication, edition,
computer support, legal
assistance.
Lump budget. 122-External assistance
11
Belgian average over the last 5 years
12
Renting an additional office similar to Durk’s office (12 m2
).
13
Depending on needs of national liaison offices hosted in the same building, some investments will be necessary.

Table 1: Baseline scenario – “natural” growth of expenses over the period 2007-2010
SECRETARIAT Year 2004 Year 2005 Year 2006 Year 2007 Year 2008 Year 2009 Year 2010
Regular
111 - Wages 259.283 € 232.218 € 234.090 € 243.547 € 253.387 € 263.623 € 274.274 €
112 - Wages (extra) 4.285 € 17.546 € 18.976 € 19.743 € 20.540 € 21.370 € 22.233 €
113 - Travel (hotel) 6.948 € 7.232 € 7.140 € 7.283 € 7.428 € 7.577 € 7.729 €
114 - Travel (flight, train) 4.069 € 5.247 € 7.140 € 7.283 € 7.428 € 7.577 € 7.729 €
115 - Travel (other) 2.976 € 2.682 € 2.550 € 2.601 € 2.653 € 2.706 € 2.760 €
116 - Office (operations) 4.709 € 9.586 € 11.220 € 11.444 € 11.673 € 11.907 € 12.145 €
117 - Office extranet 11.581 € 12.475 € 15.300 € 15.606 € 15.918 € 16.236 € 16.561 €
118 - Office (renting) 29.569 € 30.335 € 34.000 € 34.680 € 35.374 € 36.081 € 36.803 €
119 - Miscelleneous 4.764 € 2.007 € 3.000 € 3.060 € 3.121 € 3.184 € 3.247 €
328.183 € 319.327 € 333.416 € 345.247 € 357.523 € 370.261 € 383.481 €
Variable
121 - Equipments 6.107 € 6.731 € 5.000 € 5.100 € 5.202 € 5.306 € 5.412 €
122 - Expert assistance 111 € 950 € 1.000 € 1.020 € 1.040 € 1.061 € 1.082 €
123 - Secretariat staff training 508 € 1.708 € 3.000 € 3.060 € 3.121 € 3.184 € 3.247 €
129 - Contingencies 0 € 0 € 500 € 510 € 520 € 531 € 541 €
6.726 € 9.389 € 9.500 € 9.690 € 9.884 € 10.081 € 10.283 €
Regular
211 - Support to Eureau experts 995 € 522 € 1.020 € 1.040 € 1.061 € 1.082 € 1.104 €
212 - Board representation 2.258 € 1.313 € 2.100 € 2.142 € 2.185 € 2.229 € 2.273 €
213 - Catering 1.211 € 1.686 € 2.100 € 2.142 € 2.185 € 2.229 € 2.273 €
219 - Miscelleneous 70 € 0 € 664 € 677 € 691 € 705 € 719 €
4.534 € 3.520 € 5.884 € 6.002 € 6.122 € 6.244 € 6.369 €
Variable
221 - Gifts 1.673 € 1.103 € 1.000 € 1.020 € 1.040 € 1.061 € 1.082 €
222 - events (+communication) 10.003 € 3.646 € 4.000 € 4.080 € 4.162 € 4.245 € 4.330 €
229 - Contingencies 0 € 0 € 1.000 € 1.020 € 1.040 € 1.061 € 1.082 €
11.676 € 4.749 € 6.000 € 6.120 € 6.242 € 6.367 € 6.495 €
351.118 € 336.985 € 354.800 € 367.059 € 379.771 € 392.954 € 406.627 €
SECRETARIAT
EXTERNAL
TOTAL

Table 2: scenario A “10/10/10/10” - Incomes & membership fees
Member Countries Basic fees Year 2005 Year 2006 Year 2007 Year 2008 Year 2009 Year 2010
OVGW Austria 6.000 € 6.000 € 6.300 € 6.930 € 7.623 € 8.385 € 9.224 €
OWAV Austria 6.000 € 6.000 € 6.300 € 6.930 € 7.623 € 8.385 € 9.224 €
BELGAQUA Belgium 18.000 € 18.000 € 18.900 € 20.790 € 22.869 € 25.156 € 27.671 €
Water Board Nicosia Cyprus 3.000 € 3.000 € 3.150 € 3.465 € 3.812 € 4.193 € 4.612 €
SOVAK Czech Republic 6.000 € 0 € 1.575 € 3.968 € 7.623 € 8.385 € 9.224 €
DANVA Denmark 12.000 € 12.000 € 12.600 € 13.860 € 15.246 € 16.771 € 18.448 €
EWWA Estonia 3.000 € 3.000 € 3.150 € 3.465 € 3.812 € 4.193 € 4.612 €
VVY Finland 12.000 € 12.000 € 12.600 € 13.860 € 15.246 € 16.771 € 18.448 €
SPDE France 30.000 € 30.000 € 31.500 € 34.650 € 38.115 € 41.927 € 46.119 €
BGW Germany 15.000 € 15.000 € 15.750 € 17.325 € 19.058 € 20.963 € 23.060 €
DVGW Germany 15.000 € 15.000 € 15.750 € 17.325 € 19.058 € 20.963 € 23.060 €
Hellenic Union Greece 12.000 € 12.000 € 12.600 € 13.860 € 15.246 € 16.771 € 18.448 €
Hungarian Association Hungary 6.000 € 6.000 € 6.300 € 6.930 € 7.623 € 8.385 € 9.224 €
SAMORKA Iceland 3.000 € 3.000 € 3.150 € 3.465 € 3.812 € 4.193 € 4.612 €
County and City Association Ireland 6.000 € 6.000 € 6.300 € 6.930 € 7.623 € 8.385 € 9.224 €
FEDERUTILITY Italy 30.000 € 30.000 € 31.500 € 34.650 € 38.115 € 41.927 € 46.119 €
LVTA Lithuania 3.000 € 0 € 3.150 € 3.465 € 3.812 € 4.193 € 4.612 €
ALUSEAU Luxembourg 3.000 € 3.000 € 3.150 € 3.465 € 3.812 € 4.193 € 4.612 €
Water Services Corporation Malta 3.000 € 3.000 € 3.150 € 3.465 € 3.812 € 4.193 € 4.612 €
Unie van Waterschappen Netherlands 9.000 € 9.000 € 9.450 € 10.395 € 11.435 € 12.578 € 13.836 €
VEWIN Netherlands 9.000 € 9.000 € 9.450 € 10.395 € 11.435 € 12.578 € 13.836 €
NORVAR Norway 12.000 € 12.000 € 12.600 € 13.860 € 15.246 € 16.771 € 18.448 €
APDA Portugal 12.000 € 12.000 € 12.600 € 13.860 € 15.246 € 16.771 € 18.448 €
IGWP Poland 12.000 € 6.000 € 6.300 € 6.930 € 11.435 € 12.578 € 13.836 €
Slovakia Slovakia 3.000 € 0 € 1.575 € 3.465 € 3.812 € 4.193 € 4.612 €
AEAS Spain 24.000 € 24.000 € 25.200 € 27.720 € 30.492 € 33.541 € 36.895 €
Svenskt Vatten Sweden 18.000 € 18.000 € 18.900 € 20.790 € 22.869 € 25.156 € 27.671 €
SSIGE-SVGW Switzerland 18.000 € 18.000 € 18.900 € 20.790 € 22.869 € 25.156 € 27.671 €
Water UK United Kingdom 30.000 € 30.000 € 31.500 € 34.650 € 38.115 € 41.927 € 46.119 €
Observer members
BAWK Bulgaria 3.000 € 3.000 € 3.150 € 3.465 € 3.812 € 4.193 € 4.612 €
Croatian Water and Waste Water Croatia 3.000 € 3.000 € 3.150 € 3.465 € 3.812 € 4.193 € 4.612 €
Romania Roumania 3.000 € 3.000 € 3.150 € 3.465 € 3.812 € 4.193 € 4.612 €
Financial income 2.000 € 2.000 € 2.000 € 2.000 € 2.000 €
330.000 € 354.800 € 394.048 € 440.323 € 484.155 € 532.370 €

Table 3: scenario A “10/10/10/10” Expenses
Regular
111 - Wages 259.283 € 232.218 € 234.090 € 243.547 € 284.637 € 328.648 € 356.926 €
112 - Wages (extra) 4.285 € 17.546 € 18.976 € 19.743 € 24.290 € 29.173 € 30.352 €
113 - Travel (hotel) 6.948 € 7.232 € 7.140 € 7.283 € 8.678 € 10.127 € 10.330 €
115 - Travel (other) 2.976 € 2.682 € 2.550 € 2.601 € 2.653 € 2.706 € 2.760 €
117 - Office extranet 11.581 € 12.475 € 15.300 € 15.606 € 15.918 € 16.236 € 16.561 €
118 - Office (renting) 29.569 € 30.335 € 34.000 € 34.680 € 40.374 € 41.181 € 47.005 €
119 - Miscelleneous 4.764 € 2.007 € 3.000 € 3.060 € 3.121 € 3.184 € 3.247 €
328.183 € 319.327 € 333.416 € 345.247 € 401.273 € 455.839 € 497.256 €
Variable
121 - Equipments 6.107 € 6.731 € 5.000 € 5.100 € 10.202 € 5.306 € 10.412 €
129 - Contingencies 0 € 0 € 500 € 510 € 6.073 € 2.383 € 4.704 €
6.726 € 9.389 € 9.500 € 36.679 € 20.436 € 11.934 € 19.446 €
Regular
213 - Catering 1.211 € 1.686 € 2.100 € 2.142 € 2.185 € 2.229 € 2.273 €
219 - Miscelleneous 70 € 0 € 664 € 677 € 691 € 905 € 923 €
4.534 € 3.520 € 5.884 € 6.002 € 7.372 € 8.995 € 9.174 €
Variable
221 - Gifts 1.673 € 1.103 € 1.000 € 1.020 € 1.040 € 1.061 € 1.082 €
229 - Contingencies 0 € 0 € 1.000 € 1.020 € 1.040 € 1.061 € 1.082 €
11.676 € 4.749 € 6.000 € 6.120 € 6.242 € 6.367 € 6.495 €
351.118 € 336.985 € 354.800 € 394.048 € 435.323 € 483.135 € 532.370 €
SECRETARIAT
EXTERNAL
TOTAL

Table 4: scenario B “20/10/10/5” - Incomes & membership fees
Member Countries Basic fees Year 2005 Year 2006 Year 2007 Year 2008 Year 2009 Year 2010
OVGW Austria 6.000 € 6.000 € 6.300 € 7.560 € 8.316 € 9.148 € 9.605 €
OWAV Austria 6.000 € 6.000 € 6.300 € 7.560 € 8.316 € 9.148 € 9.605 €
BELGAQUA Belgium 18.000 € 18.000 € 18.900 € 22.680 € 24.948 € 27.443 € 28.815 €
Water Board Nicosia Cyprus 3.000 € 3.000 € 3.150 € 3.780 € 4.158 € 4.574 € 4.802 €
SOVAK Czech Republic 6.000 € 0 € 1.575 € 3.968 € 8.316 € 9.148 € 9.605 €
DANVA Denmark 12.000 € 12.000 € 12.600 € 15.120 € 16.632 € 18.295 € 19.210 €
EWWA Estonia 3.000 € 3.000 € 3.150 € 3.780 € 4.158 € 4.574 € 4.802 €
VVY Finland 12.000 € 12.000 € 12.600 € 15.120 € 16.632 € 18.295 € 19.210 €
SPDE France 30.000 € 30.000 € 31.500 € 37.800 € 41.580 € 45.738 € 48.025 €
BGW Germany 15.000 € 15.000 € 15.750 € 18.900 € 20.790 € 22.869 € 24.012 €
DVGW Germany 15.000 € 15.000 € 15.750 € 18.900 € 20.790 € 22.869 € 24.012 €
Hellenic Union Greece 12.000 € 12.000 € 12.600 € 15.120 € 16.632 € 18.295 € 19.210 €
Hungarian Association Hungary 6.000 € 6.000 € 6.300 € 7.560 € 8.316 € 9.148 € 9.605 €
SAMORKA Iceland 3.000 € 3.000 € 3.150 € 3.780 € 4.158 € 4.574 € 4.802 €
County and City Association Ireland 6.000 € 6.000 € 6.300 € 7.560 € 8.316 € 9.148 € 9.605 €
FEDERUTILITY Italy 30.000 € 30.000 € 31.500 € 37.800 € 41.580 € 45.738 € 48.025 €
LVTA Lithuania 3.000 € 0 € 3.150 € 3.780 € 4.158 € 4.574 € 4.802 €
ALUSEAU Luxembourg 3.000 € 3.000 € 3.150 € 3.780 € 4.158 € 4.574 € 4.802 €
Water Services Corporation Malta 3.000 € 3.000 € 3.150 € 3.780 € 4.158 € 4.574 € 4.802 €
Unie van Waterschappen Netherlands 9.000 € 9.000 € 9.450 € 11.340 € 12.474 € 13.721 € 14.407 €
VEWIN Netherlands 9.000 € 9.000 € 9.450 € 11.340 € 12.474 € 13.721 € 14.407 €
NORVAR Norway 12.000 € 12.000 € 12.600 € 15.120 € 16.632 € 18.295 € 19.210 €
APDA Portugal 12.000 € 12.000 € 12.600 € 15.120 € 16.632 € 18.295 € 19.210 €
IGWP Poland 12.000 € 6.000 € 6.300 € 7.560 € 12.474 € 13.721 € 14.407 €
Slovakia Slovakia 3.000 € 0 € 1.575 € 3.780 € 4.158 € 4.574 € 4.802 €
AEAS Spain 24.000 € 24.000 € 25.200 € 30.240 € 33.264 € 36.590 € 38.420 €
Svenskt Vatten Sweden 18.000 € 18.000 € 18.900 € 22.680 € 24.948 € 27.443 € 28.815 €
SSIGE-SVGW Switzerland 18.000 € 18.000 € 18.900 € 22.680 € 24.948 € 27.443 € 28.815 €
Water UK United Kingdom 30.000 € 30.000 € 31.500 € 37.800 € 41.580 € 45.738 € 48.025 €
Observer members
BAWK Bulgaria 3.000 € 3.000 € 3.150 € 3.780 € 4.158 € 4.574 € 4.802 €
Croatian Water and Waste Water Croatia 3.000 € 3.000 € 3.150 € 3.780 € 4.158 € 4.574 € 4.802 €
Romania Roumania 3.000 € 3.000 € 3.150 € 3.780 € 4.158 € 4.574 € 4.802 €
Financial income 2.000 € 2.000 € 2.000 € 2.000 € 2.000 €
330.000 € 354.800 € 429.328 € 480.170 € 527.987 € 554.286 €

Table 5: scenario B “20/10/10/5” Expenses
Regular
111 - Wages 259.283 € 232.218 € 234.090 € 274.797 € 318.412 € 339.780 € 368.507 €
112 - Wages (extra) 4.285 € 17.546 € 18.976 € 23.493 € 28.343 € 28.910 € 30.078 €
113 - Travel (hotel) 6.948 € 7.232 € 7.140 € 8.533 € 9.978 € 10.178 € 10.382 €
115 - Travel (other) 2.976 € 2.682 € 2.550 € 2.601 € 2.653 € 2.706 € 2.760 €
117 - Office extranet 11.581 € 12.475 € 15.300 € 15.606 € 15.918 € 16.236 € 16.561 €
118 - Office (renting) 29.569 € 30.335 € 34.000 € 39.680 € 40.474 € 46.283 € 47.209 €
119 - Miscelleneous 4.764 € 2.007 € 3.000 € 3.060 € 3.121 € 3.184 € 3.247 €
328.183 € 319.327 € 333.416 € 388.997 € 443.101 € 476.963 € 514.023 €
Variable
121 - Equipments 6.107 € 6.731 € 5.000 € 10.100 € 5.202 € 10.306 € 5.412 €
129 - Contingencies 0 € 0 € 500 € 12.779 € 12.791 € 21.261 € 15.004 €
6.726 € 9.389 € 9.500 € 26.959 € 22.155 € 35.812 € 24.746 €
Regular
213 - Catering 1.211 € 1.686 € 2.100 € 2.142 € 2.185 € 2.229 € 2.273 €
219 - Miscelleneous 70 € 0 € 664 € 677 € 691 € 705 € 719 €
4.534 € 3.520 € 5.884 € 7.252 € 8.672 € 8.845 € 9.022 €
Variable
221 - Gifts 1.673 € 1.103 € 1.000 € 1.020 € 1.040 € 1.061 € 1.082 €
229 - Contingencies 0 € 0 € 1.000 € 1.020 € 1.040 € 1.061 € 1.082 €
11.676 € 4.749 € 6.000 € 6.120 € 6.242 € 6.367 € 6.495 €
351.118 € 336.985 € 354.800 € 429.328 € 480.170 € 527.987 € 554.286 €
SECRETARIAT
EXTERNAL
TOTAL

Annex 1
MECHANISM FOR
GRADUAL INCREASE OF NMS MEMBERSHIP FEES
(as approved at the board meeting in Berlin on October 28, 2005)
The proposed mechanism agrees with the principle of gradual increase of NMS membership
fees but also has to take into consideration the situation of other NMS associations and to
ensure an equal treatment for all of them.
Three basic principles are considered:
- The first year is free of charge.
- In all cases, 3,000 € per year is the minimum fees
- Membership fees will be increased gradually by a 3,000 € step over a period of 3 years.
The table below summarises the evolution of membership fee for the three NMS of specific
concerns
Before 2005 2005-2007 2008-2010 After 2010
Hungary 3 000 € 6 000 € 6 000 € 6 000 €
Poland 3 000 € 6 000 € 9 000 € 12 000 €
Czech republic 0 € 3 000 € 6 000 € 6 000 €
For Czech Republic, only half of membership will be requested for year 2006 as they became
member in June 2005.
The Board also decided in Berlin on October 28.2005 to increment all membership fees
categories by 5% starting from year 2006.

Annex 2
BUDGET FOR AN ALTERNATIVE HOUSING
Office renting: 10 workers. No parking place is needed for personal car (in this case
additional renting costs would amount to 1 500 € / year and place)
REGULAR ANNUAL COSTS IN 2006
Location Rue d’Idalie (next to the EP) Avenue des Arts
Price per m2 and year 220 € / m2 and year 150 € / m2 and year
Extra (taxes, “charges”) 60 € / m2 and year 60 € / m2 and year
Sub-total for 300 m2 84,000 € /year 63,000 € / year
Phone14
23,000 € /year 23,000 € /year
Electricity 3,000 €/ year 3,000 €/ year
Water 300 € / year 300 € / year
Heating 6,000 € / year 6,000 € / year
Cleaning service 10,000 € / year 10,000 € / year
Overheads (10 persons) 42,300 € / year 42,300 € / year
Total regular costs 126,300 € /year 15
105,300 € / year
INVESTMENT COSTS
Communication and computer network (250 € per desk) 2,500€
Inner walls 40,000 €
Materials (beamer, tables, chairs, cupboard …) 20,000 €
Office removal 7,500€
Total 70,000 €
To be finalised : needs of each partner (Eureau, Water UK, Dutch associations) / other
national associations willing to join / mechanism for allocating costs / meeting room facility
14
Based on a comparison with a stakeholders association similar to Eureau which is located in the center of Brussels and
employs 5 workers
15
This means a annual cost per m2 of 421 € which is quite high in comparison with real estate survey (391 € / m2 and year
source Cushman Wakefield)

Annex 3
Comparison of Eureau with other European stakeholders associations
Name & address President Other executive staff Organisation Nb of secretariat staff Annual budget
Eureau
127 rue colonel Bourg
1140 Brussels
www.eureau.org
Union of national
associations
− Rota system by country
− 1-year term
− Main executive person
(according to the status)
− Variable presence in
Brussels
− Secretary General
− vice president without
statutory power)
− 3 commissions divided
in working groups
− 1 Secretary General
− 1 assistant
− 1 part-time secretary
+/- 350,000 €
FEAD16
Rue Philippe le Bon 15
1000 BRUSSELS
www.fead.be
Union of national
associations
− Elected
− 2 years (renewable once)
− +/- twice per month in
Brussels
− 3 vice presidents
− 8 permanent working
groups
− 11 task forces
− 1 policy advisor (second
is being recruited)
− 1 part-time secretary
“insufficient”
CEEP17
Rue de la Charité, 15 bte 12
1210 Brussels
www.ceep.org
Union of national
associations
− Elected
− At least once per month
in Brussels
− (several vice
presidents without
statutory power
− 10 permanent
Committees
− 3-5 tasks forces
− Working groups
− 1 Deputy secretary
General
− 1 Director
− 5 permanent policy
advisors
− 5 external project
officers
− 1office manager
− 3 assistants
+/- 1,000,000 €
(?)
16
European Federation of Waste Management and Environmental Services
17
European Centre of Enterprises with Public Participation and of Enterprises of General Economic Interest

Name & address President Other executive staff Organisation Nb of secretariat staff Annual budget
EULA18
Rue du Trône, 61
B-1050 Bruxelles
www.eula.org
Union of national
associations
− Elected
− 2 years
− Chairing board and
assembly
− Workload: 4 days a
month
− Secretary General − 4 committees
− +/- 20 task forces
− 1 legal officer
− 1 scientific officer
− 1 engineer
(standardization)
− 1 office manager
1,000.000 €
Euroheat19
Avenue de Tervuren 300,
1150 Brussels
www.euroheat.org
Associations and individual
members
− Elected
− Chairman
−
− Managing director
− Elected Board of
directors
− 2 Forums
− 5 Task Forces
− 3 working groups
− 1 managing director
− 3.5 staff
600,000 €
Eurocities
18 Square de Meeûs, B-
1050 Brussels
www.eurocities.org
Individual members
− Elected
− 3 years
− Elected executive
committee (12
members)
− 1 CEO
− 6 permanent forums
− +/- 35 working groups
1 chief executive officer
25 persons staff
/
18
European Lime Association
19
International association for district heating, district cooling and combined heat & power

Annex 4
Projected tasks allocation amongst Eureau staff members
- Managing lists of members and contacts 2 2
- Document management / extranet 4 4
- Newsletters / Issue trackers 1 3 4
- Accountancy 1 5 6
- Legal affairs 1 1 2
- Catering 3 3
- Planning procedures (including budget) 2 1 3
- Meeting documents 2 2 2 6
- Assistance to the President 2 1 1 4
- Alerting members 2 2 1 5
- Preliminary assessment of EU developments 2 2 2 6
- Understanding / explaining the context 2 2 2 6
- Advising on position papers 1 1 2
- Assisting chairmen and technical secretaries: 2 3 5
- to organizing surveys 0
- to liaise with other Eureau bodies 0
- to draft work plans and reporting 0
- to finalize position papers 0
- Production of facts and figures 1 9 10
- collecting insights 2 2 1 5
- organizing contacts with EU officials 2 2 4
- attending committees meeting 4 4 2 10
- organizing workshops 2 4 2 8
- networking with other water operators bodies 1 3 4
- Maintaining contacts with members organisations 3 2 5
- Participation to national events 2 2 1 5
- Answering various requests 1 1 1 1 4
- Extrapolating from position papers 2 2 4
- Advise on Eureau's communications 10 10
- Managing the Eureau web site 2 2 4
- Corporate brochure 2 1 3
- Annual report 2 1 3
37 37 37 26 137
Communication 24
Liaison with the EC
Commission, the
EP and other
stakeholders
31
Members 14
Assistance to the
Commissions
34
Tasks
Assistance to
executive bodies
13
Frédéric (37h/ week)
Secretary General
Durk (37h/ week)
Assistant SG
Administration and
backstopping
21
XXXX (37h/ week)
Communication officer
Valérie (26h/ week)
Office manager
total
per
task
total per
categorie

Strategic planning and control cycle 2007-2010) for Eureau

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Strategic planning and control cycle 2007-2010) for Eureau

More from Frederic de Hemptinne

Recently uploaded

Strategic planning and control cycle 2007-2010) for Eureau