EDOC7180

17 October 1994

Doc. 7180

REVISED

1403-13/10/94-11-E

REPORT

on the enlargement of the Council of Europe

and the budgetary prospects

(Rapporteur: Sir Keith SPEED,

United Kingdom, European Democratic Group)

Summary

The Assembly is of the opinion that the time has come to start considering the budgetary and administrative consequences of its enlargement.

In order to be able to cope with this enlargement, it is urgent that the Organisation be given the necessary resources and that member states commit themselves financially in order to allow the Council of Europe to fully perform its role as guarantor of the democratic security and stability.

I. Draft recommendation

1. The Assembly draws attention to the Vienna Declaration, adopted on 9 October 1993 by the heads of state and government of the member states of the Council of Europe, in which the Council of Europe's pan-European role was clearly acknowledged.

2. The Assembly refers to its Recommendation 1247 (1994) on the enlargement of the Council of Europe, adopted on 4 October 1994, which confirms the Council of Europe's mission to bring together all the countries of the continent.

3. The Assembly, however, is concerned about the decision taken in April 1994, by the Ministers' Deputies, to freeze the Organisation's budget for 1995 and hopes that this will not be a recurring problem each year.

4. This decision is in conflict with the political will that has been clearly affirmed, and it must be clear that the Council of Europe will be unable to cope with the expansion of its tasks and the enlargement of its membership without a substantial increase in its budgetary resources.

5. Moreover, it is equally obvious that, in order to guarantee the Organisation's financial stability and proper functioning, all member states will have to scrupulously fulfil the financial duties and obligations which are theirs.

6. The Assembly considers that it is becoming a matter of urgency to examine both the budgetary and administrative effects of enlargement, including the problems relating to the size and structure of the Secretariat.

7. The Assembly believes that it is essential that the Council of Europe, which is the broadest European organisation, is able fully to perform its role as guarantor of the democratic security and stability of the continent and that this mission justifies a more important financial commitment from the member states.

8. The Assembly asks the Secretary General:

i. to start considering the future size of the Secretariat and its redeployment in the light of clearly established priorities;

ii. to examine the possibility to proceed to a new allocation of responsibilities between the senior management posts of the Secretariat;

iii. to ensure that a secretariat structure respecting the autonomy of the bodies concerned is set up;

iv. to propose arrangements enabling nationals of new member states to be rapidly taken on as officials;

v. to increase the appropriations for staff training and introduce a time credit system;

vi. to co-operate closely with the Assembly, and particularly with its Committee on the Budget and the Intergovernmental Work Programme, in all the budgetary and administrative questions connected with enlargement.

9. The Assembly recommends that the Committee of Ministers:

i. demonstrate political consistency and give the Organisation the financial resources and staff to enable it to cope with the consequences of enlargement and of its new pan-European mission;

ii. seek new forms of funding for the Organisation and request that a specific Council of Europe entry be included in national budgets;

iii. not use the new accessions in order to reduce the contribution of states which are already members;

iv. take the necessary steps to allow the voting right of any state one year behind with the payment of its contribution to be automatically suspended;

v. study measures that would make it possible, where necessary, to give assistance to the most disadvantaged countries which are unable with their own resources alone to play an active part in the work of the Organisation;

vi. allocate the budget resources necessary for an additional working language in the Assembly;

vii. finalise, as soon as possible, their work on the drawing up of more equitable contribution scales.

II. Draft order

The Assembly instructs its Committee on the Budget and the Intergovernmental Work Programme to continue its work and report regularly on the consequences of enlargement in the administrative and budgetary fields, and to follow closely the proposals made by the Secretary General in this respect.

III. Explanatory memorandum

by Sir Keith SPEED

1. At the Vienna Summit on 9 October 1993, the Council of Europe's pan-European role was clearly recognised. The Council of Europe has become an organisation which assembles the majority of the new democracies of central and eastern Europe as genuine partners in the European construction process. In this context, the Committee on the Budget and the Intergovernmental Work Programme considers it necessary to reconsider the Council of Europe's enlargement and its impact on budgetary prospects, particularly in the light of the contradiction between the political decision taken at the Vienna Summit and the Ministers' Deputies' recent decision to impose zero growth (which will in fact be negative growth) on the Organisation's 1995 budget.

2. The committee is extremely concerned by this contradiction and will be unable to countenance any reversion to a zero growth policy, which would completely destroy the efforts made over the last few years. It can only deplore the Ministers' Deputies' statement that they would not reconsider the decision taken at their 511th meeting (April 1994) to fix the ceiling of the 1995 ordinary budget at 800 million French francs.

3. The Assembly considers that in order to cope effectively with its recently acquired new role, the Council of Europe must be given additional resources commensurate with its more extensive tasks and the increased number of members. Enlargement is already a reality which must be faced, particularly by the Parliamentary Assembly, which already has a large number of special guests associated in its proceedings.

4. It follows that enlargement will have significant consequences not only for the Council's internal structures and operation but also for the duties and obligations devolving on the new member states.

I. Consequences on linguistic level

5. One of the consequences of enlargement is the possible introduction of new official or working languages, an issue already raised in Mr Martin's memorandum on modifications to the Council of Europe's official and working languages (AS/Bud (44) 31), following the draft orders on the use of Russian as a working language of the Assembly (Doc. 6761) and on increasing the number of official languages of the Council of Europe (Doc. 6846).

6. The question of official languages and working languages is governed by the Statute of the Council of Europe, and by the Rules of Procedure of the Parliamentary Assembly and the Committee of Ministers.

7. Article 12 of the Statute stipulates:

"The official languages of the Council of Europe are English and French. The Rules of Procedure of the Committee of Ministers and of the Parliamentary Assembly shall determine in what circumstances and under what conditions other languages may be used ...".

8. The Rules of Procedure of the Committee of Ministers (Article 12) and the Rules of Procedure for the meetings of the Ministers' Deputies (Article 8) confirm that the official languages are French and English, and specify that a permanent representative may speak in any other language than the official languages but in that case must personally provide for interpretation into one of the official languages.

9. The Assembly Rules of Procedure (Rule 17.3) provide that in addition to the two official languages, German and Italian are used in the Assembly and may be used by its committees as additional working languages.

10. It is plain from the above texts that the official languages are established by the Statute and that the addition of a further official language requires an amendment to the Statute and hence concerted action by the two statutory bodies.

11. Where working languages are concerned, the decision rests with each body, with the stipulation that it is for the Committee of Ministers to adopt the Council of Europe budget in which provision must be made for the necessary resources.

12. The introduction of a new official or working language is clearly a political matter before all else, as shown by discussion on the subject during the debate concerning the revision of the Statute of the Council of Europe in May 1993, when it was proposed that German and Italian should also become official languages. The enlargement of the Council of Europe accounts for the fact that this question is again on the agenda, particularly having regard to the aforementioned draft order proposing the addition of Russian as a working language.

13. This question is furthermore being reviewed by a Deputies' ad hoc working party.

14. From a financial point of view, estimates by the Budget Committee in 1992 suggest that the introduction of another official language would require a further annual outlay of approximately 100 million French francs, which would be increased by translation and other costs, whereas the introduction of a new working language in the Parliamentary Assembly would represent approximately 12 million French francs more per year.

15. Moreover the Budget Committee pointed out that the introduction of new official languages would pose practical problems, such as the need to alter meeting rooms, increase the number of translators and interpreters and so on. It explained by way of an example that during peak periods the use of four extra official languages would make it necessary to accommodate 400 more staff for translation and typing services, in a situation where the Council already has considerable difficulty in housing the present staff numbers.

16. Your Rapporteur considers one must be resolute in adopting a position on an issue of this kind. In view of the very high financial cost of another official language and the difficulty which would be encountered in confining the increase to a single new language, he considers it wise not to embark on this operation.

17. As regards working languages in the Parliamentary Assembly, he would also prefer that the status quo, namely the use of Italian and German, be maintained and that national parliaments wishing their languages to be used should bear the inherent expenses, as is now the case with Spanish, Dutch, Portuguese and Turkish.

18. Nonetheless, considering the far lower cost of a working language, he feels that the introduction of another language would not put undue strain on the budget and that it should be possible for the Committee of Ministers to allocate additional resources if the Assembly considers this expedient.

19. As to the choice of the language, the Bureau will need to discuss the matter and consult the Committee of Ministers before the Assembly is presented with a formal proposal.

II. Consequences for the Council's structure and functioning

20. Enlargement also implies a need for new human resources to be made available. Thus, despite the creation of new posts in recent financial years, staff resources remain insufficient. We do not want to advocate a massive increase in staff, which would inevitably complicate the management of the Organisation and would not automatically increase its effectiveness. However, consideration should be given to the creation of a certain number of additional posts to enable the Council of Europe to increase its presence on the ground and to decentralise part of its organisation. This has been tentatively begun with the establishment of outposts in a number of central and eastern European capitals, to which could be added offices to liaise with other international bodies. Such a decentralisation process would also make the Organisation better able to fulfil its new pan-European role. The creation of these additional posts should make it possible to incorporate nationals of new member states into the Secretariat, in accordance with the quotas they are allocated. This could be done by programming over a number of years.

21. The size and structure of the Secretariat also needs to be reviewed. In this context, your Rapporteur has asked for detailed budget figures as well as staff forecasts in order to be able to analyse the budget and administrative consequences of the new accessions. While it is obvious that enlargement requires and justifies a significant increase in staff, it is equally clear that the Secretariat's resources need to be redeployed in order to ensure that staff management is more effective and better adapted to new requirements. Sound staff management would include opening the Secretariat to staff from new member states without penalising others. The Assembly will have to exercise all due vigilance in this respect.

22. This review should also focus on the new allocation of responsibilities between the most senior posts in the Secretariat. It is increasingly clear that the Council of Europe possesses three functions: intergovernmental, parliamentary and judicial. While it is well established that the first is served by a Deputy Secretary General and the second by a Clerk to the Assembly with the rank of Deputy Secretary General, the judicial activities are not backed up by the authority of a senior official of this rank. In this context, the Vienna Summit's decision to reform the European Convention on Human Rights and create a single controlling body has rationalised, and at the same time strengthened, the judicial sector. The creation of a Registrar of the new Court with the rank of Deputy Secretary General would be a logical extension of this reform. It would permit the establishment of a more balanced Secretariat structure which respected the autonomy of the bodies concerned and would only serve to confirm an already well-established trend.

23. Moreover, while there should not be a major expansion of posts of this level, the creation of a reasonable number of senior management posts (A7 and A6) could well facilitate a more rational allocation of responsibilities and offer an effective response to enlargement.

24. Appended to this report is Mr Schiesser's memorandum on the strengthening of the Secretariat structure, on which the Rapporteur has based his ideas on this subject.

25. In this context, the training aspect is of crucial importance for both the new and existing staff members who will be required to deal with these new responsibilities devolving on them. Suitable training will enable them to meet this new challenge successfully. It will therefore be necessary to introduce a system of credits for hours of in-service training and to increase the Organisation's training budget accordingly.

26. Finally, your Rapporteur can only endorse the steps taken by the Sub-Committee on the European Civil Service to strengthen the staff's right of negotiation in non-salary matters, as well as their legal protection.

III. Duties and obligations of member states

27. Enlargement creates a growing risk of financial instability. While hitherto all member states, including the newcomers, have honoured their financial commitments, it is to be feared that some of the nine applicant countries will experience real difficulties in meeting their budget contributions.

28. For that reason, it needs to be asked whether the Council is ready to face the threat of financial instability and, if so, what resources it has at its disposal.

29. The Committee of Ministers is currently engaged in a revision of Resolution (74) 25 establishing new contribution scales for member states to the budgets of the Council of Europe, which was last revised in 1984. The working party has already taken note of the anomalies of the existing system and appears to favour a system that takes more account of economic data, which should trim the contributions of several new member states. At all events, the contribution formula will have to be more equitable and your Rapporteur is glad to see that moves are being made towards a system that makes it possible to remedy striking inequalities.

30. A new budgetary policy is therefore required, which, to ensure the Organisation's financial stability, should be based on new methods of financing, involve enforcement provisions to ensure that contributions are paid and provide for the creation of a solidarity fund.

31. As a rule, respect for financial obligations to the Organisation is ensured by Article 9 of the Council of Europe's Statute, which states that:

"The Committee of Ministers may suspend the right of representation on the committee and on the Consultative Assembly of a member which has failed to fulfil its financial obligation during such period as the obligation remains unfulfilled".

This system is already in force in other international organisations.

32. However, experience shows that these are difficult decisions to make, requiring considerable time for consideration and consultation. Arrangements might therefore be made for automatically suspending members in arrears of payment for a period to be specified (one year, for instance). This would make it possible to do justice to the states that conscientiously meet their financial obligations, thereby guaranteeing the smooth functioning of our Organisation.

33. Member countries must in any case safeguard the stability of our Organisation and display solidarity. What has happened is that the wealthier countries have taken advantage of the accession of the countries of central and eastern Europe to reduce their contributions to the Council's budget. This is politically unacceptable to the Parliamentary Assembly. Given that these new accessions are bound to have considerable budgetary and administrative repercussions, it would be reasonable if contributions from new member states were added to the current budget. Your Rapporteur hopes that when Resolution (74) 25 is revised, particular care will be taken to maintain the principles of fairness, proportionality and solidarity, while at the same time improving the Council of Europe's financing.

34. However, in order to safeguard the Organisation's financial stability, new forms of financing must also be explored. A proposal along these lines has already been put forward in a debate in Warsaw by our colleague, Mr Jung. This proposal would involve the inclusion of a specific item for the Council of Europe in national budgets. In most member states at present, the financing of the Council of Europe, like that of all international organisations other than the European Union, is subsumed, for budgetary purposes, within the operating costs of their ministries of foreign affairs. The pressures to which these ministries' budgets are subject have had a negative impact on the level of funding for international organisations as a whole. These restrictions have led to the zero growth policy which has been applied more or less indiscriminately to all international organisations.

35. Bearing in mind the large number of activities which benefit ministries other than the ministries of foreign affairs, as well as the new political importance of our Organisation and its role as a guarantor of democratic security and stability in Europe, the inclusion of a quite separate item in each member state's budget would be totally justified. This practice is moreover followed by certain states in the financing of the partial agreements.

36. However, other formulas exist, examples of which are partnerships with private foundations or companies, a notion which was moreover endorsed at the Vienna Summit.

37. Lastly, in order to secure the Organisation's future stability, the establishment of a support fund will need to be considered in order to help young democracies meet the expenses which their participation in our activities entails. The fund, to be set up for a fixed term, would thus make it possible to assist in them in consolidating their democratic structures and in defraying part of the costs arising from their participation in our activities. Your Rapporteur proposes that the Committee on the Budget and the Intergovernmental Work Programme draw up proposals for the creation of this support fund.

IV. The intergovernmental work programme

38. Your Rapporteur hopes that the intergovernmental work programme will develop in a more pragmatic fashion with more attention to the real needs of member states, particularly newcomers to whom a special effort must be devoted. Indeed, the existence of over 200 committees of experts which have very heavy and expensive working methods according to their budget, leads to dispersal which is incompatible with our new pan-European role.

39. The work programme must also respond more practically to the Council of Europe's new role, that of the leading pan-European organisation and the guarantor of democratic security in Europe. The new intergovernmental work programme will have to be backed up by effective, computerised management resources. It will also be necessary to establish a communications policy in order to avoid duplication between the Organisation's various activities and with those of other international organisations.

40. Certain activities could be regrouped in order to focus on specific areas, such as Europe's democratic stability. Within the Assembly, the Bureau has already initiated discussions on this issue and has decided to create an ad hoc committee to examine the subject and make proposals on committee structures. In the meantime, existing committees have to ensure that all activities are properly administrated and take fully account of the reality of the budget.

41. Your Rapporteur further proposes that the Committee on the Budget and the Intergovernmental Work Programme prepare recommendations for rationalising the activities of the Organisation as a whole.

V. Conclusions

42. Your Rapporteur is aware of the difficulty of finding solutions to the problems he has raised.

43. He nevertheless believes that it is essential to achieve coherence between the political and financial decisions which are being taken. Thus, it is quite illogical to contemplate the accession of several states, including Russia and at the same time prescribe zero growth.

44. He appeals for political resolve on the part of governments and for solidarity so that the Council may fulfil its pan-European role to the utmost.

APPENDIX

Strengthening the structures

of the Council of Europe Secretariat

Memorandum submitted by Mr Schiesser (Switzerland, LDG), Rapporteur

1. The motion for a resolution on strengthening the structures of the Council of Europe Secretariat, presented by Mr Pini and others (Doc. 6833), considered that the problem to which it referred could be solved by increasing the number of Deputy Secretaries General of the Council of Europe.

2. At its meeting on 1 March 1994, the Committee on the Budget and the Intergovernmental Work Programme discussed this motion with the Deputy Secretary General, Mr Leuprecht and I should like to make the following remarks:

a. There is no text which clearly defines the remit of the Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe. It has therefore been dictated by practice and the willingness of the Secretary General to delegate certain powers to the Deputy Secretary General.

b. In his replies to the questions from members of the committee, Mr Leuprecht stressed the need to increase the staff of the Organisation. I draw attention, in particular, to the following sentence: "The Secretariat does not suffer from a lack of 'generals' but from a shortage of troops".

Following the discussion, I prepared a memorandum on this subject.

3. This memorandum does not purport to be exhaustive or definitive. The new Secretary General has just taken up his duties and it is essential to hear his views on all these questions before embarking too far on such a delicate matter.

4. I should therefore like to confine myself to a few thoughts which may be useful for a further reflection.

a. Given the enlargement of the Council of Europe and the increasing number of tasks it has to carry out, the staffing complement is inadequate, despite the creation of posts decided upon by the Committee of Ministers in recent financial years. If we are to discuss strengthening the structures of the Secretariat, priority should be given to addressing this problem. Creating new posts appears to be essential, although the objective is not a massive increase in staff numbers, which would disrupt the cohesion and flexibility of the Organisation. The Council must be given the resources with which to carry out its new duties, to be more present on the ground and to play its educational role to the full; it should also be enabled, if appropriate, to re-locate some of its structures (for instance, by setting up information points or liaison offices) in view of the enormous geographical area it now covers. It is also urgent to absorb nationals from central and eastern European countries into the Secretariat. If we are to carry this out efficiently and rapidly, a reasonable, gradual increase in staff numbers will be necessary.

b. The training aspect is also becoming increasingly important, for both new members of staff from central and eastern Europe and for other members of staff, who have to adapt to the Organisation's new pan-European dimension. It is now vital — and urgent — to allocate them extra hours for in-service training and to increase the Organisation's training budget accordingly.

c. With regard to the possible creation of one or more additional Deputy Secretaries General, I should like to point out that at present, in addition to the Deputy Secretary General, the Clerk of the Assembly also holds the rank of Deputy Secretary General.

d. As is increasingly becoming clear, there are three aspects to the Council of Europe: intergovernmental, parliamentary and judicial. While the first is clearly catered for by a Deputy Secretary General, and the other by a Clerk of the Assembly with the rank of Deputy Secretary General, the judicial activities are not backed up by the authority of a senior official of this rank. In this connection, I should point out that the Vienna Summit, in deciding to reform the European Convention on Human Rights and to set up a single supervisory organ, thereby rationalised and, at the same time, reinforced the judicial sector. In my opinion, the creation of a Register of the new Court with the rank of Deputy Secretary General would be a logical step to take.

e. Although the principle of having a Council of Europe Secretariat as a single unit remains valid, certain adjustments have already been made to safeguard the independence of the European Court of Human Rights. In particular, no appointment may be made to the Registry of the Court without the approval of the President or Registrar of the Court.

f. The Parliamentary Assembly's independence should also be safeguarded by strengthening functional links between the Clerk of the Assembly and the Office of the Clerk of the Assembly with the Assembly and its bodies and with the President.

g. If in future the Council of Europe Secretariat were to have three equal-ranking Deputy Secretaries General, it would probably be useful to give them different titles so as to avoid confusion between the three sectors.

h. In my opinion, it is important to seek greater flexibility in allocating responsibilities within the Secretariat. This flexibility could be achieved by creating "adviser" or "project head" posts, for the supervision of certain specific projects. These advisers would be directly responsible to the Secretary General. This does not amount to an innovation with regard to current practice, but is merely a consolidation and extension.

Reporting committee: Committee on the Budget and the Intergovernmental Work Programme.

Budgetary implications for the Assembly: none.

Reference to committee: standing mandate.

Draft recommendation and order unanimously adopted by the committee on 5 October 1994.

Members of the committee: Sir Keith Speed (Chairman), MM. Cox, Schiesser (Vice-Chairmen), MM. Adamiak, Attard Montalto, Biefnot, Boucheron, Bugli, Daniel, Eörsi, Gjellerod, Gunnarsson, Mrs Hacklin, Mrs Hjelm-Wallén (Alternate: Mrs Fleetwood), MM. Jurgens, Kolár, Lupták, Maass, Martins, Mattina, Mautner-Markhof, Mrs Moreno, MM. Motiu, Mulvihill, Mrs Özver, MM. Pavlidis, Pukl, Ragno, Mrs Ringstad, MM. Steiner, Theis.

N.B. The names of the members present at the meeting are printed in italics.

Acting secretary to the committee: Mrs Nollinger.