« Performing Efficient Models of Administration Capacity and Regional Reform in the European Union»

European Parliament15 October 2008 Bruxelles

Romanian Municipalities Association EU Office

The content of the presentation

• Brief description of the Romanian local government system

• Public service obligation and the organisation of public services

• Structural funds assistance for the improvement of the quality of the public services

• Inter-communal cooperation

• Improving performance through European cooperation

• Final remarks

Brief description of the local government system I• The administrative territorial units in Romania are:

communes, towns, municipalities and counties;

• Romania has 41 counties (judete), 103 municipalities (municipii), 208 towns (orase), and 2825 communes (comune).

• Romania has 8 development regions, each of them being formed by the voluntary association of neighbouring counties.

• NB! Development regions are not administrative-territorial units with legal personality. Their main role is to manage the programming exercise, the implementation of the regional development programs and management of EU funds.

Brief description of the local government system II

County authoritiesCounty council – directly electedPresident – directly elected since 2008

Competences:• Economic and social development • Territorial development• Water supply and sewage • Public transport• County roads • Social assistance to children• Education

Brief description of the local government system IIILocal authoritiesMayor & Local council – directly elected

Competences:• Housing• Urban planning• Environmental protection • Waste management • Public health• Social assistance• Local transport infrastructure • Water supply and sewage system • Education (except academic level)• Administration of the local heritage• Security, through the local police.

The public service obligation - I

• The majority of public services are delivered by the local authorities but they don’t have exclusive competences in the organization and financing of the public service;

• The local authorities are the closest level to the citizens’ and they are the first to be responsible if the quality of the service is not reaching the expectations of the public;

• Good governance and public consultation shall generate practical solutions and better models to improve the quality of local services.

The public service obligation - II Public service Regulating

authority Set up and operation of the service

The financing of thepublic service

Oraganization of the service

Example:

Water andsewage

National RegulatingAuthority forCommunity Servicesof Public Utility(ANRSC)

National Athority for Regulating and Monitoring Public Procurement (ANRMAP)

Ministry of Interior and Reform of the Public Administration (MIRA)

Ministry ofEnvironment andSustainableDevelopment (MMDD)

In general the localauthorities (communes,towns and municipalities)are responsible to setup the service. In somecases the service isorganized by the county councils.

The local/regionaloperator for water andsewerage.

The infrastructurebelongs to the localAuthority.

The service is financedfrom the own revenuesof the operator; in case the revenues are not covering the costs plus a profit margin, public service compensations are needed.

The investments could be financed jointly by theoperator and thelocal/county councils, or from the state budget via the national investment programmes, from the EU programmes.

Could be a publicoperator, a privateoperator or a publicprivate partnership.

The public service obligation - III• The interplay between the national and the local

governments is quite complex, as the public service provision lies within the competencies of local authorities, but is largely influenced by the central government;

• EU legislation is setting strict rules for the operation of the service as well: public procurement legislation, state aid and public compensation rules;

• Do we need better legislation, effective multilevel governance, more money or all the above?

Structural funds assistance - IOperational programme

Key intervention areas Total allocation 2007-2013 (mio EUR)

EU co-financing from ERDF (moi EUR)

ROPRegional Operational Programme

• Integreated urban development projects

•County roads, urban steets, ring roads

1,391.7

876.7

1,117.8

758.4

SOP Competitiveness

Improvement of energy efficiency at the level of end users

192.4 149.2

SOP Environment

Extension/modernization of water/wastewatersystems

Development of integrated wastemanagement systems and extension ofwaste management infrastructure

3,266.5

953.6

2,776.5

762.9

NRDPRural Development Programme

Village renewal and development,improvement of basic services for theeconomy and rural population, conservationand upgrading the rural heritage

1,579.2 1,546.1

TOTAL 6,488.5 5.415.6

Structural funds assistance - II

• The amount of 6,488.5 million EUR from ERDF will be used to finance local authorities’ projects for the improvement of the public services;

• Local strategies, master plans and pipeline projects should have been outlined and agreed upon by county/local councils;

• Administrative capacity building projects at the local level have started before accession and must continue: human resources development, multi-annual financial planning etc.

Inter-communal cooperation

Organization of public services at the regional level is a priority for the Romanian local governments and a precondition to access structural funds (e.g. water and wastes) for several reasons:

Better quality of the services; Cost effectiveness and insufficiency of local

financial resources, especially in the small municipalities;

Better value for money.

European cooperation

• There is no model that fits for all in terms of the organization of public services that is why European cooperation brings an important added value;

• Interreg, Urbact and FP7 are providing financial assistance for European cooperation projects;

• The European Grouping for Territorial Cooperation (EGTS) can be used by the local authorities to organize public services at cross border.

Final remarks• Governance and partnership must work

better in practice in order to improve the quality of the public services, we shall not focus only on the financing and legal aspects;

• Boosting administrative capacity at the local and counties level to develop projects is still a major priority in Romania;

• Benchmarking and evaluation methods are not exploited enough by the public service operators to improve their performance.

Thank you for your attention!

Calin CHIRA Romanian Municipalities Association    

EU Office in Brussels 1 - Square de Meeûs, 1000 Bruxelles

E-mail: calin.chira@amr-bruxelles.eu   Tel: +32 (0)2 213 82 30 Fax: +32 (0)2 213 82 39