Panorama presents an exclusive interview with former Commission Vice-President Siim Kallas, chairperson of the High Level Group on Simplification. To achieve better results and promote more beneficiary-friendly procedures, the European Commission is focusing on maximising the potential for simplification in 2014-20. To help with this ambitious task, a High Level Group of independent experts was set up by the Commission last July to monitor simplification for beneficiaries of European Structural
- 06 June 2016
Panorama presents an exclusive interview with former Commission Vice-President Siim Kallas, chairperson of the High Level Group on Simplification.
To achieve better results and promote more beneficiary-friendly procedures, the European Commission is focusing on maximising the potential for simplification in 2014-20. To help with this ambitious task, a High Level Group of independent experts was set up by the Commission last July to monitor simplification for beneficiaries of European Structural and Investments Funds (ESIF). Below, Siim Kallas, the chairperson of this High Level Group, gives an update on the group's progress.
Mr Kallas, can you briefly explain the purpose of the High Level Group
Our group's objective is to make sure that all the available options to simplify the life of the beneficiaries are taken up by Member States. We look at positive examples of how it is already being done as well as the reasons why other countries hesitate. We also look to the future, thinking outside the box to find untapped ways to achieve simplification. We advise the European Commission on how to further reduce the administrative burden for beneficiaries of the European Structural and Investment Funds during the current programming period and reflect on the longer-term prospects, providing input for post 2020.
What motivated you to accept the position of chairman of the HLG and what challenges have you encountered in this role?
My personal interest in simplification comes from a background of carrying out reforms in Estonia, especially from ensuring the wide use of IT tools in government. In addition, I am motivated by my time as the European Commissioner responsible for the discharge of the EU budget. I would like to see that everywhere in Europe public administration always strives towards simplifying the way it communicates with citizens.
The European Structural and Investment Funds represent a significant portion of the EU budget and are greatly appreciated by citizens, regions and Member States. They are one of the very real ways that citizens can see the impact the EU makes in their own regions. Many beneficiaries complain that accessing European funds is too difficult, and even when funding is provided, managing a project through bureaucracy and audits makes them want never to try it again. This has an important impact on the reputation of the funds and we need to make sure that it does not detract from the objectives we are trying to achieve with this investment.
I believe that one of the greatest problems is that error is considered disproportionally from a political point of view. For instance, a simple mistake in following the procedure is considered to be an error. When the Court of Auditors reports that there is a three percent error, everyone jumps to the conclusion that three percent of the Cohesion money is being wasted. And because everyone is just so afraid to make an error, Member States frequently ask for clarification and more guidance. This guidance then becomes soft law, causing more restrictions and greater legal uncertainty. This all becomes an ‘unmanageable regulatory jungle’. We have to stop this vicious circle of perpetual regulation manufacturing.
What has the group achieved so far and what else does it hope to achieve?
The High Level Group has actually achieved quite a lot. In less than a year, we have met three times and have already analysed four topics: e-Governance; Simplified Cost Options (SCOs); access to EU funding for SMEs; and financial instruments. On 1 March, a first set of conclusions and recommendations on e-Governance and SCOs was sent to the Commission and made available to all interested parties. By the end of June, we hope to agree on and publish the second round of conclusions and recommendations on access to EU funding for SMEs, and financial instruments. These are interim reports, so to speak, on the different topics addressed and we will contribute to the final report on simplification in 2018. At the moment, we are focusing on those areas where we see the potential to make an impact in the current period, but later this year we will turn our full attention to consider what we think a simpler implementation framework should look like for post 2020. We intend to deliver our report on that subject before the summer of 2017 so that the Commission has time to include it in its reflection on the future of Cohesion Policy.
Can you tell us a little more on what we can expect from your next meeting which will focus on gold plating?
Administrations themselves add layers of regulations and controls to avoid errors. But more regulation simply means more complications and more errors, which is a big problem for our beneficiaries. During our next meeting, two of our members will present their report on ‘gold plating’. We will also hear evidence from the viewpoints of managing authorities, implementing bodies, local governments and, of course, the final beneficiaries. This discussion should give us a good overview of the situation so that our group can put forward concrete recommendations on how to deal better with this important issue.
As the chairperson of the HLG, how do you think simplification will be achieved?
Everybody wants results and money properly used, so simplification should ensure that the delivery system is streamlined so that the focus can remain on results. For this period, we need to maximise the possibilities that already exist – we have already made some recommendations on what we think could be achieved, such as by making it easier for managing authorities to use simplified costs.
For the future, I think this will require a more radical approach – one that reflects some of the changes in the priorities for the Funds. What I mean is that the framework would need to be more tailored to the type of investments, for example by having a more flexible approach to reflect the nature of the different financial instruments. We also need to address the issue of trust between the different layers of audits and control.
For both this period and the future, I am of the opinion that simplification will only be achieved if there is the political will and support from all actors. There is a growing appetite for simplification. Obviously, the Commission is open to finding better ways to implement the funds as it has set up the High Level Group, but I have also seen the same openness in my engagement with the European Parliament and the Committee of the Regions. I know the Member States are also ready so I am optimistic that we can find concrete solutions.