Regions struggle for power

Date: 01/06/06

The way in which member states of the European Union implement their regional policy varies enormously. Just as there is a great diversity of languages and cultures throughout the EU, so there are significant differences in the distribution of power, in the importance and independence given to regional authorities.

Mostly, this is a matter of politics and history, which have determined whether power is concentrated centrally or shared with the regions. The end result is that the degree of decentralisation differs from one EU state to another. But the constant feature throughout the EU is a power struggle between the central government and the regions.

In Germany, Spain, Italy and Belgium there is a strong sense of decentralisation, with regions having a good deal of power. The power of the German regions is enshrined in the federal structure, since they make up the Bundesrat, one of the two houses of the federal parliament. Any German federal minister who comes to Brussels for meetings of the Council of Ministers on topics such as environment or agriculture must consult with the 16 German states (L�er) beforehand. On certain issues, it is the L�er which have complete competence. During the revision of the television without frontiers directive, it was the relevant Bavarian minister who represented Germany in EU meetings because the regions control policy on culture and media. From the regions' point of view this is a good thing. "It is easier to understand a region's needs from the local level than from Berlin. I can't even remember the last time a federal minister was in my area," says one regional official. But a debate is growing in Germany on whether some power should be given back to the federal government, a move which will be strongly resisted by the L�er.

This type of power struggle is often greatest in states where power has traditionally lain with the central government. In Sweden, very little power is held by the regions despite the fact that they have been clamouring for more responsibility. "It was important for us to become members of the EU," says Sofie Gardestedt, director of the South Sweden office in Brussels. "We suddenly had another power centre, the European Commission, to which we could turn and it has always been very receptive."

For Gardestedt, decentralisation is about democracy and moving power closer to the citizens. She says there is also a "logic" in having a region decide its own policy. "It doesn't make sense for a capital to be making decisions for a region."

In the UK, devolving power became a way of responding to the desire for Scottish autonomy and addressing the Northern Ireland conflict. But often the politics of the moment decides where power lies. France has traditionally been a centralised power, though a certain level of autonomy has existed in the regions. The difficulty in recent years has arisen with local regional administrations being in the hands of left-of-centre politicians while a right-of-centre government was in power in Paris. There was an attempt to claw back control to the centre. "France needs to regionalise," says Alain Rousset, president of the region of Aquitaine. "That could happen if there were a change of government."

The new EU member states of eastern and central Europe, having lived for decades under centralised Communist control, embraced the idea of decentralisation. In 2001, Slovakia passed a law which enforced decentralised power and now aspects of transport, healthcare, social care and education are determined in the eight regions. This year some regions began levying taxes and will soon be able to control EU structural funds. Andrea Oel-Brettschneider, director of Bratislava's regional office in Brussels, says the experience has so far been a positive one, but for a small, relatively poor EU country there is a difficulty in passing power to the least developed part of a state. "Here in Brussels everyone has a nice office with computers but at the local level in Slovakia computerisation is just starting. Often there is only one computer per office and there are huge projects to try to get people trained," she says. A lack of expertise at regional level in EU affairs is also a problem, she adds.

In Poland, power was also decentralised but not in the same clear-cut way. Sixteen regional offices, known as marshals' offices, have been created to make decisions locally. But 16 separate offices, known as voivodships, representing the central government were already in existence. While the latter control the purse strings, the marshals' offices decide policy. "There is double-checking, double responsibility. It is not good," says Dariusz Kozak of the Opolskiego regional office in Brussels.

Again, changing the system would be a big political decision in which jobs would be lost and power would be shifted from the central government. But like Slovakia, Poland is relatively new at decentralisation, so much fine-tuning can be expected in the future. From his position in Brussels, Kozak knows that there is a steep learning curve ahead, especially looking at how other regional offices do business: "We are too young to do all the best practices that other well-established regional offices do. But the direction is the same as them and in the future we will grow in strength."

Article takes a look at the diversity across the European Union's Member States regarding the territorial distribution of power and the importance and independence given to regional authorities.
Article is part of a European Voice Special Report, 'Europe's regions'.

• Primary Source