€¦ · web viewit met its objectives - it was a policy conference and our policies were shared...

Draft Notes of Ex Co MeetingBrussels, June 2017

1. Apologies, Agenda, Minutes

Participants (members): Carla (UK), Ian (Int Fed of Social Workers) Krisztina (Hungary), Tess (Ireland), Nadia (Luxembourg), Laila (Latvia), Karel (CZ), Eugen (Austria), Jens (Germany), Tiina (Finland), Ana (Slovakia), Raluca (Romania), Kamila (Poland), Jo (Netherlands), Nino (Croatia), Biljana (Macedonia), Richard (France), Luigi (SMES) David (Belgium), Kart (Estonia), Vito (Italy), Per (Denmark), Saviour (Malta), Maria (Bulgaria), Sergio (Portugal), Carlos (Spain), Jasmina (Serbia)Participants (staff) Leo, Philippe, Magda, Sigrid, Fintan Apologies: Ninette (Cyprus) Joanna (Norway) Olga (Greece) Vilborg (Iceland) Freek (FEANTSA)

➢ Adoption of Draft AgendaAgenda adopted

➢ Approval of Minutes of April 2017Minutes approved

➢ Matters arisingIt was not possible to have an Extraordinary General Assembly (to sign off the 2016 accounts) at this meeting, because the Commission has asked numerous questions about the accounts, which are thus not ready for sign off by the Ex Co.

Action point Responsible Deadline

A1. Accounts to be finalised and signed off in October

Philippe, Treasurers and General Assembly

21 October

2. Reflections on Policy Conference, Future of Europe ➢ Shared feedback on the Policy Conference

Positive feedback Less positive feedback

It met its objectives - it was a policy conference and our policies were shared with high level decision makers

Lack of interpretation made it difficult, especially PeP colleagues

PeP colleagues were a good addition, despite language issues

Not enough time given for discussions - we need less speakers on panels

Logistics worked well Not clear if morning discussions were captured well enough in the key points made in plenary

Morning sessions were well structured and helpful Is this conference worth the time and money?

Need to not forget that many Ex Co members have also experienced poverty when planning such conferences

Proposed Action point Responsible Deadline

A2. Reference Group of Policy Conference to reflect more deeply on the conference, reflecting on the changes we might make for 2018

Reference Group September

➢ Follow up discussion on the Future of Europe

Key points from discussion● Italy and Spain have already been working on the Future of Europe, both have produced

papers on it, with specific recommendations. Both feel we need a sixth scenario, as the 5 proposed by Juncker are inadequate, providing simply an economic frame.

● While we should support the SDG Watch 6th scenario, we should also work on what we want as EAPN. Our scenario should emphasize fighting poverty - this should be at the core.

Decision

D1. EAPN will support the SDG Watch 6th scenario and undertake communication activity on 20 June

D2. Ex Co gives a mandate to a sub-committee to take forward the work on creating an EAPN position on the Future of Europe


A3. Circulate SDG Watch 6th scenario to Ex Co members and request comms activity

Rebecca 20 June

A4. Undertake comms activity on the 6th scenario EAPN members 20 June

A5. Sub-committee to work on EAPN position on the Future of Europe

Portugal, Spain, Iceland, Italy, France and IFSW

TBC

A6. Create a Future of Europe space on the Members Room where this sub-committee can work.

EAPN Staff team TBC

3. Ex Co Work Programme (FEAD and ESF / 20%)

Discussion of the TORs for both clustersDraft terms of reference for the two clusters were circulated before the meeting. ESF Cluster: the main objective of the cluster is to continue the work of the Task Force on the monitoring of the 20%. Work of the ESF will not be confined to the cluster, other EAPN members should contribute. We will need to build a mailing list for that purpose.


A7. Add ‘To engage with the stakeholder dialogue on Structural Funds and with the ESF Platform, in particular the Thematic Network on Inclusion’ to the ESF/20% ToR section on ‘ways of working’

EAPN Portugal Sep

FEAD Cluster: Key points from discussion

● We should look at the principles underpinning the programme as well - are some FEAD funded projects perpetuating poverty?

● We should clarify our aims and define clearly what EAPN wants for FEAD● EOs should be included in the process - the questionnaire should be sent to them as well● We need to know what happens with FEAD at national level● Important questions to be included in the questionnaire:

➢ What target groups? ➢ Who decides the products that go into food packages?➢ How can we ensure continuity of the programme? Why should the programme

continue? Why is this programme important for EAPN?

Decisions

D3. The ToR was agreed by the cluster group.

D4. The questionnaire will be updated


A8. Collect feedback from the cluster members on the questionnaire

Magda 25 June 2017

A9 Change the questionnaire based on the discussions had during the cluster meeting at the Ex Co and based on the feedback sent.

Magda and steering group

10 July 2017

ESF/ 20% Cluster: Key points from discussion

● Some national networks are actively engaged in the National Committees - but even for them it is hard to know what was included in the ESF 20% spending earmarked for Social Inclusion.

● This is the information we need to gather through the questionnaire that will be developed.

Decisions:

D5. Final TORs agreed, pending change noted above

D6. An email list, comprising of Exco members and/or ‘experts’ who work on the ESF for their organisations, will be built to support this work

D7. A questionnaire will be developed which all EAPN members will be asked to complete to monitor the use of the 20% ESF funds earmarked for social inclusion

Action points Responsible Deadline

A10. Send email to all Exco members asking them to give contact details for people to follow this work on ESF from their membership (ESF Email Group).

Fintan Follow up when minutes are sent.

A11. Develop questionnaire to collect information on the reality of the use of ESF funds (20%) for social inclusion and on the follow up of the partnership principle.

EAPN Portugal to coordinate, with input from the Cluster.

Questionnaire to be developed between June and early Sept.

A12. Ask ESF Email List to complete the questionnaire Sergio to coordinate

Time table to be agreed (likely to be between end of Sept and Mid Nov)

4. Open Space exchange between networks: challenges and solutions

Key points from the Open Space discussion on ‘Campaigning’

Exchange: There was a round of exchanges on campaigns that Networks have done or are involved in and this was considered useful and inspiring.

The current procedures for EAPN Europe to support a national campaign is as follows:

a. If the national network supports the campaign, and if the campaign is in line with, or not contradicting agreed positions of EAPN Europe, and has not implications for other Networks or for the overall work programme of EAPN, then the support is automatically given.

b. The National Network concerned helps to shape the message and support that is needed (for example drafts the letter or message needed).

It is less clear how to proceed if the campaign is not directly in line with EAPN Europe positions, has implications for other Networks or for the overall work programme of EAPN. This may be something to look at in due course.

A key question we need to return to is ‘how we can work on a common topic for an action on the same issue and in the same time period in all countries? - Discuss the idea of common EAPN campaigns (like proposal from Norway or

common use of 17th Oct. Europe day (May 9) has few shared activities – EAPN could use this as a common day of actions.

- Use 17 Oct to address to local regional Councils/Governments Example of actions and support

- Should we open an ‘ideas market’ where we can share proposals and look for support

- If joint actions are stimulated remember to report back at Exco Find a way for open discussions on difficult questions:

- How can we reach people experiencing poverty- How can we get to know the ‘invisible poor’ (eg In work poverty)- How can we get attention to our goals ideas, actions?- How to get access to funding/resources?- How to deal with ‘abusive’ governments?

Key points from the Open Space discussion on ‘how to make EU policies understandable at the national level’

We need clearer, more understandable language We need fewer documents, less boring documents We need to find less technocratic ways of talking about politics We need to avoid being an ‘alibi’ for the European Commission in the way we speak We need to make our work and positions understandable to normal people

We need to allow ‘our’ words to come out more – as People experiencing Poverty We need to be careful to not replicate the system we are fighting against in our documents We need to have fewer ‘empty words’ and more ‘solidarity acts’

Key points from the Open Space discussion on ‘the definition of poverty’Attended: UK, IRL, IT, IFSW, LUX, EST

While poverty is fundamentally about a lack of money, the discussion focused on how poverty makes people feel – both within themselves and in their communities. This decision was taken because participants thought that it was the thing that people with direct experience of poverty raised frequently as the worst thing about living in poverty.

Emotions highlighted included stigma, anger, and isolation, and the different impact that these emotions can have on different groups such as children, lone parents and disabled people.

Highlighting the emotional impact of poverty, rather than just the material, could lead to a better public understanding of what it really means to live in poverty and make people more sympathetic to tackling the causes of poverty.

There was a remarkable level of agreement between participants about the emotional impact of poverty – it could be an area to explore further as a network.

Discussions also focused on poverty’s impact on health, on the different causes of poverty, and on what focus EAPN should take (extreme poverty, children in poverty, education as part of a solution, adequacy of services) but there was much less agreement.

No definition of poverty was reached, given the differences in how the different networks themselves define poverty.

Reflection on the Open Space methodology● In general, there was a very positive reaction to the Open Space methodology - people felt it

gave life to what it means to be part of EAPN and helped to break down barriers. It created more tolerance between members, and inspired some members to continue the work. Some felt it changed the spirit of the meetings, allowing for a more constructive, more convivial meeting.

● More space needs to be allowed to discuss specific proposals.● There were some difficulties with the methodology - it was hard to get started, to group

proposals and to establish clear topics for discussions. ● In the future, we might need a narrower ‘frame’ for the discussions. ● Ideally, group discussions should be smaller and less formal. ● This methodology could be adapted for many discussions we need to have in EAPN.


A13. Create a draft proposal for concrete procedures for asking EAPN for support for national level campaign.

EAPN Croatia and Macedonia TBC

A14. Create an overview of all actions on the 17th of Oct within EAPN staff team TBC

EAPN.

A15. Reflect on the key points from the conversation about making EU policy understandable

EAPN staff team TBC

5. Management, Administration and Finances

Director’s report + Bureau reportThe presentation can be access directly on the Members Room. Key points from the discussion include:

● Staff sickness is important - this needs to be prioritised. This includes both introducing burn-out legislation into the work rules, providing individual and team training where relevant, and focusing on individual development through a revised appraisal process. The stressful situation can be attributed to the heavy workload, and internal communication issues.

● We should have a specific discussion on EOs at the next Ex Co meeting● Notes of all Bureau meetings are on Members Room - however, the Ex Co would appreciate

more details in the Bureau’s part of the report.● It was reiterated that Carlos Susias and Maria Jeliazkova are EAPN’s Treasurers.

Decisions:

D7. Director’s report should always include an update on staffing issues

D8. October meeting will have a discussion about EOs role in EAPN

D9. Director to prioritise staff issues, including stress and burnout.

Budget vs. expenditure reportKey points from discussion

● Within the framework of the EaSI grant, up to 20% can be transferred between budget headings. We are thus able to transfer funds from one budget line into another if necessary - where we have underspend, we can reallocate.

● Travel and subsistence are low at the moment - though this will change when we account for the June meetings.

● It is much easier for the Ex Co to read and understand the budget and expenditure in this format. Management and presentation of the finances has improved.

● In September, we will have clear projections for the rest of the year and will be able to take decisions if we risk running over budget.

● The cash-flow issue will come up every year, if we continue with the current system, but the director and Philippe have improved the situation. Further action will need to be taken in 2017 and beyond to fix this.


A16. Discuss cash flow issue, banks and loans Ex Co October 2017

Staff remuneration overview Leo presented an overview of discussions which have taken place within the Bureau,

highlighting a problem which has been identified - that of the unlimited 1.5% annual increase on all staff salaries, which creates a big financial burden on EAPN over the course of time.

Options for dealing with this issue in ways which are acceptable to the Ex Co and hopefully fair to the staff team were presented and discussed.

The proposal: reduced annual increase to 0,5% on top of inflation, capped after 10 years, increased pension from 3,8% to 6%.

Key points from the discussion● Proposals will take place with the staff team next week, following this exchange.● The 1.5% benefit has been in place for over 15 years in EAPN, and it is not clear why and

how it was decided to introduce it.● Based on advice taken, it is the opinion of the Director that proposals are in line with Belgian

law. To comply with the law we would need to introduce new stipulations in the work rules and then individual contracts.

● It was noted that we already provide health insurance, so this is not an alternative option.● It was agreed that this is a good first step, but it is not an overall solution to EAPN’s issues of

financial sustainability (which include funding diversification, adequate funding for workload etc)

Decisions:

D8. There was a unanimous decision of the Ex Co to mandate the Director to negotiate about the 1.5% issue with the staff, on the basis of the presented proposal.


A17. Negotiate with staff, based on proposal of reduced annual increase to 0,5% on top of inflation, capped after 10 years, increased pension from 3,8% to 6%

Leo 21 June 2017

6. Ex Co Work Programme on MFF and Financing for Social Protection

6a. Financing for Social Protection

Participants: Biljana (EAPN Macedonia), Carla (EAPN UK), David (EAPN Belgium), Nadia (EAPN Luxembourg), Saviour (EAPN Malta), Tess (Ireland), Ian (IFSW), Krisztina (Hungary), Kart (EAPN Estonia), Per (EAPN Denmark), Richard (EAPN France), Luigi (SMES)

Overview of discussion

Decisions

D9. The output will be a short document (4 pages), ideally with an accompanying presentation to help explain. It will include a definition of the welfare schemes EAPN would like to see, the aims of social protection system, and crucially how we can finance such social protection systems (tax, redistribution, salary caps etc)

D10. We will work with an expert who will be responsible for writing the paper and the presentation

Action points Responsible Deadline

A18. Establish a Financing for Social Protection google group

Leo 25 June

A19. Organise a webinar about the Financing for Social Protection to take this forward

Leo 19 July

A20. Establish process for selecting an expert Leo TBC

6b. The Multiannual Financial Framework Participants: Jasmina - EAPN Serbia, Maria - EAPN Bulgaria, Eugen - EAPN Austria, Sergio - EAPN Portugal, Kamila - EAPN Poland, Laila - EAPN Latvia, Elena - EAPN Lithuania, Jens - EAPN Germany, Anna - EAPN Slovakia, Carlos - EAPN Spain, Vito - EAPN Italy, Jo - EAPN Netherlands, Magda - Staff

Key points from the discussionWe need to know the following:

a) What are the objectives of this work, and what are the main issues we want to highlight?b) The decision making process and timelines around the MFF

● We should remember that the next MFF will come into existence in 2021. We should shortly have more details on the process and timescales, within the Commission, Council and Parliament, and we can then plan exactly what we might want to do and how.

● The work on the MFF is at a more abstract level - we need to decide if we want a separate separate anti-poverty funding programme or we want to include poverty in different programmes. We need to make an attempt to focus our work.

● The work should not focus specifically on different funding programmes


A21. Develop a proposal and share with the group Carlos, Vito and Jo

TBC

A22. Those who are interested in taking these conversations forward will meet online

TBC TBC

7. Evaluation

Evaluation on post its - 2 questionsQ1: What was the most useful session at this ExCo Meeting?Members were invited to put post-its on a flip chart. The word cloud below is a visual representation of the discussions members found most useful – the most prominent words are those which were highlighted the most often by members. Open Space discussions were highlighted as the most useful discussions by 8 networks, Financing for Social Protection by 3, and MFF by 2.

Q2: What topics would you like to discuss in the ExCo in the future?

Logistical suggestions for the future:

Clearer, more precise information and instructions 2

More time for, and better organised group work

Send docs earlier

Shared Ex Co / EUISG session

Be clearer about expected results

Organise entertaining moments to build the network

Improve timekeeping

Accommodation needs to be less noisy

Not enough food at lunch, and was of low quality food at dinner

There were accessibility issues at the restaurants – this should be taken into consideration in the future.

Again, members were invited to highlight topics on post-its. Topics have been grouped into two main areas. There was much less agreement on where we should focus in the future – three networks want to see more national exchanges at the Ex Co, two want to spend more time looking at projects, and two want to focus more on social policy issues.

Internal functioning of EAPN Issues

National exchanges and cooperation between networks 3 Social policy issues 2

EAPN projects / joint projects 2 Mental health and well being

EAPN principles, objectives and values EU anti-poverty strategy

EOs role in EAPN MFF

Streamlining EAPN governance FEAD

More details of the Bureau and Bxl office Energy poverty and sustainability

Inequality

Grassroots messages on poverty

Impact of poverty post-2020

€¦ · web viewit met its objectives - it was a policy conference and our policies were shared...

Documents