Commission enters a ‘brave new world’

Date: 20/01/2000

The European Commission finally unveiled its far-reaching blueprint for reforming the institution this week. Simon Taylor examines Vice-President Neil Kinnock's proposals and assesses his chances of success

"IT IS going to be a brave new world for everyone in the Commission," said one of the architects of internal reform this week. This is no exaggeration. Indeed, if anything, it hardly does justice to the immense scope of changes planned for the administration by Vice-President Neil Kinnock.

If the proposals unveiled this week win the support of the institution's powerful staff unions, cost-conscious member states and the European Parliament, President Romano Prodi's term in office will see the most radical shake-up of the Commission in its 42-year history.

With a vast raft of changes which will leave few areas of the institution's activities untouched, Kinnock is planning to transform the administration's financial controls, introduce a more meritocratic approach to appointing and promoting staff, and ensure that the Commission sets clear priorities and only takes on those tasks which it has the resources to carry out effectively. And all this has to be done in two and a half years.

Ever since the committee of independent experts concluded that it was "difficult to find anybody in the Commission with a sense of responsibility", leaving the Santer administration with no choice but to fall on its sword, it has been clear that the institution could not delay much-needed root-and-branch reforms any longer.

With the public's disgust at reports of fraud and nepotism within the administration translating into the lowest-ever turnout for a European Parliament election last June, EU governments made Commission reform the number one priority for the man they chose to succeed Jacques Santer as president.

Prodi in turn handed that task to former Transport Commissioner Neil Kinnock, whose experience in reforming the British Labour Party and trade union links - coupled with a personality which combines joviality with plain-speaking - made him the ideal man to steer the reforms through.

His 84-point action plan is a mixture of measures to ensure the Commission 'catches up' with best practice in modern administrations around the world and others which, if implemented, would represent the great leap forward promised by Prodi.

In some areas, Kinnock is proposing new procedures which, though revolutionary for the Commission, have been standard practice in some member states' national administrations for years. Under this category comes the cumbersome-sounding activity-based management.

The rationale underlying the new system is that the Commission should decide on its political priorities first, before allocating staff and money to fulfil these objectives. The old approach - under which decisions on what activities the Commission should undertake were generally taken "quite separately" from decisions on the allocation of resources - is seen as a key reason for the institution's past failings, encouraging it to accept responsibility for tasks which it could not properly perform.

To change this, Kinnock is planning a complete overhaul of how the Commission decides which tasks it is going to take on, ending the old, somewhat ad hoc approach towards drawing up its annual and five-year work programmes. As part of this, the Prodi Commission will reserve the right to turn down requests from member states to manage certain tasks if it feels it is not being given the resources to do the job properly.

In other areas, Kinnock's proposed changes go beyond current practice in some member states' civil services. In line with recommendations made by the committee of wise men, which attacked the existing system of financial controls for allowing officials to escape responsibility for any abuses of public funds, the vice-president plans to make staff directly accountable for budget decisions.

As the consultation document says: "A central objective of the reform is the creation of an administrative culture that encourages officials to exercise responsibility for actions over which they have control."

Yet in other areas, Kinnock has stopped short of trying to introduce practices which are common in other public administrations around the EU.

When it comes to career development, officials in the UK civil service only get promoted when they take on jobs with more responsibility. But for the Commission, Kinnock is planning to retain elements of the old career ladder, where officials are graded and paid on a rising scale linked to their qualifications, the number of years they have served and their age, although individual performance will play a much greater role in future in deciding who gets promoted.

To succeed, Kinnock's reform plan - which will be followed by a White Paper on 1 March once staff unions, member states and the European Parliament have been consulted over the next four weeks - must be adopted as a whole.

In order to get the unions to swallow the far-reaching changes Kinnock wants to introduce, he has promised to defend their existing salaries and pensions against attacks from member states which argue that the current pay package, with its low taxes and raft of allowances, is unjustified. "Quality will be properly remunerated and the general conditions of employment of Commission staff should, therefore, not deteriorate," states the reform paper.

Commission officials' terms of employment are due to be renegotiated in 2001, but Kinnock is planning to roll over the existing conditions for an extra year so that officials' generous terms are preserved as part and parcel of the reforms.

EU governments have already given Prodi broad political backing at the highest level for the changes now being proposed. But they might well try to cut back on some of the perks which officials now enjoy, despite Kinnock's fears that any attempt to make savings would provoke a repeat of last year's strikes and scupper the chances of introducing meaningful reforms.

At first sight, the planned changes appear to offer officials a major improvement on the current system, which tends to reward time-servers, who end up underperforming and wasting taxpayers' money, while leaving potential high-flyers demotivated and frustrated.

All officials will be given a detailed job description setting out their duties, responsibilities and objectives, and their performance will be assessed on a regular basis. Promotion will be more closely linked to performance, management skills will be taken into account when appointing officials to top jobs, and working conditions will be modernised to introduce practices such as flexitime and job-sharing. The current rigid structure of five career grades which makes it difficult for a talented clerical worker to move into a policy post will be revised, allowing more scope for personal advancement.

But at the same time, a more merit-based approach could erode the job security that officials now enjoy.

Disciplinary procedures will be overhauled so that it is easier to get rid of staff who break the rules.

Promotion to senior management positions will be on a probationary basis and staff who do not make the grade at higher levels could be demoted.

The consultations with staff unions, EU governments and MEPs which will take place over the next month will provide clear pointers as to Kinnock's chances of success. According to his advisors, he is open to suggestions for changing some of the proposals outlined in the paper. But the fact remains that all the reforms he has set out will be necessary to restore the Commission's reputation for efficiency and public service. Officials will have to be seen to be providing better value for money if member states are to continue to pick up the bill for their generous pay packages.

The key question is whether all the parties involved have the nerve to embrace what is a historic opportunity for change.

Major feature. The European Commission has finally unveiled its far-reaching blueprint for reforming the institution. Article examines Vice-President Neil Kinnock's proposals and assesses his chances of success.