Twenty years of EU co-Twenty years of EU co-financed programmes financed programmes

in Greece:in Greece:

Dex AGOURIDESDirector GeneralManagement Organisation Unit of the Community Support Framework (M.O.U. s.a.)

webmaster@mou.grwww.mou.gr

evolutionevolution of administrativeof administrative structuresstructures

2

Benefits

Structural funds in Greece were managed by public bodies

Despite persisting problems, experience has shown that after 20 years:Technical and administrative capacity

improvedTransparent monitoring and coordination

mechanisms establishedReformed institutions in place

3

1989-1993: CSF I

1994-1999: CSF II

2000-2006: CSF III

“Light” Regulatory Framework

Simple implementation procedures

“Reformed” Regulatory Framework

Responsibilities transferred to Member States. Strict audit

systems. Need for reforms in public administration

“Standardised” Regulatory Framework

EU and Member-States equally responsible in programming and

decision making

Implementation of EU Regional Policy in Greece

4

From CSF I to CSF II

Appointment of external Management Consultants (use of Technical Assistance)

Introduction of interministerial cooperation process (i.e. Mixed Guidance Committees)

Establishment of government agencies run with private sector rules

Introduction of a uniform MIS Establishing a networking mechanism

Response: Weaknesses:

Structural inefficiencies in public sector

Needs:

Greater involvement of the private sector

5

From CSF II to CSF III Weaknesses: Bureaucratic procedures Lack of flexibility due to the

public accounting system for payments

Lack of specialised staff Technological gaps (IT) Lack of incentives for

accelerated performance

Needs: Decentralisation of decision

making Less bureaucracy Emphasis on monitoring,

evaluation and control Sound financial management,

transparency in implementation

Emphasis on human resources (skills & expertise, training)

New institutional framework introduced

Legislative reforms New technologies in the public

sector and new tools Systematic use of technical

assistance Partnership / Consultation

Response:

6

MANAGEMENMANAGEMENTT

IMPLEMENTATIOIMPLEMENTATIONN

Fragmentation in many small projects Large number of weak and inefficient Final Beneficiaries Lack of specialised human resources and know-how Technological gaps

Cumbersome procedures delaying implementation Lack of flexibility Inadequate coordination between Government departments Lack of independence of management bodies

FRAMEWORKFRAMEWORK ISSUESISSUES

REGULATORREGULATORYY

Tight requirements, too demanding and causing delays in implementation

Introduction of uniform procedures rather than adjusted to national standards

Incompatibilities of national legislative framework with management and control systems established by EU regulations

Overall assessment

7

Cumbersome procedures Simplification of procedures

Large number of Operational Programmes

Reduction of Operational Programmes

Coordination problems, synergies, overlap of responsibilities

Development of an innovative management and control system based on best practices

Multitude of weak and inefficient implementing bodies (Final Beneficiaries)

Rationalisation of implementing bodies - Enhancement of their technical and managerial capacities - Introduction of certification system

Issues of compliance of legislation, in sectors crucial for co-funded projects

Consolidation of pending legislative issues

Transition towards the period 2007-2013Transition towards the period 2007-2013Guiding principles for the futureDifficulties encountered so far

8

Wide consultation with social partners Establishment of a more coherent institutional

framework Gradual improvement of performance in terms

of planning & implementing programmes and projects

Partnership with the private sector Introduction of reforms with positive spillover

benefits across the entire public administration

The main impact of Structural Funds on Greek Administration:

Good Governance

9

Why MOU?Why MOU?The CSF Management Organisation Unit (MOU s.a.) is a non-profit makinginstitution operating under the auspices of the Ministry of Economy and Finance.

It was established in 1996 as a support mechanism in order to:

Tackle problems identified during the implementation of the CSF Fill specific know-how gaps Strengthen the administrative and management capacity of CSF

implementing bodies By-pass the rigid administrative procedures and inflexibilities of the Greek

Civil Service

The MOU’s role is to complement The MOU’s role is to complement and notand not substitute civil-service taskssubstitute civil-service tasks

MOU supports public administration in the effective management and implementation of the CSF by meeting specific needs in:

highly specialised human resourcesinfrastructure support (offices, equipment and IT)consulting (management systems, tools and know-how)

10

Value-AddedValue-Added

It is a unique agency combining qualified experts from both the private and public sector

New cultural aspect in New cultural aspect in public administration: public administration:

pilotpilot

The MOU is widely recognised as a model, flexible and efficient structure:

It provides quality technical assistance

Modernisation of Modernisation of public structurespublic structures

It is able to timely respond to a number of urgent needs and demands

Flexibility, efficiency & Flexibility, efficiency & immediate responseimmediate response