|
|
||||||||||||||
|
Guidelines for improving access to social protection and explanatory memorandum Group of Specialists on Access to Social Protection I. GUIDELINES FOR IMPROVING ACCESS TO SOCIAL PROTECTION 1. Improving communication and information about rights, benefits and services
1. Improving communication and information about rights, benefits and services
The Heads of State and Government of the member States of the Council of Europe, meeting in October 1997 in Strasbourg for the Organisation's Second Summit, in their final declaration identified social cohesion as "one of the foremost needs of the wider Europe and (…) an essential complement to the promotion of human rights and dignity". They went on to instruct the Committee of Ministers to define a social strategy to respond to the challenges in society and to carry out the appropriate structural reforms within the Council of Europe. The first step taken by the Committee of Ministers was to set up a new intergovernmental steering committee, the European Committee for Social Cohesion (CDCS), bringing together several formerly separate areas of work (social policy, social security and employment). The activities relating to social cohesion are therefore based on multidisciplinarity. The Committee's terms of reference state that "the first task of the Committee will be to prepare a strategy for the development of social cohesion activities within the Council of Europe for consideration by the Committee of Ministers"; it is further indicated that this strategy should contain "a programme of work for the medium term". One of the key aspects of the Council of Europe’s social cohesion strategy is the promotion of effective access to social protection for people who although fulfilling the conditions of entitlement, have difficulty in asserting their right to social protection. The Group of Specialists on Access to Social Protection (CS-PS), which met several times between 1999 and 2001, was entrusted by the CDCS to develop policy guidelines aimed at the improvement of access to social benefits and social services. This activity has been guided by the legal instruments of the Council of Europe, particularly the Social Charter which makes the right to social protection one of the main components of social rights, by the legal instruments of the Council of Europe in the field of social security and social assistance, and by previous Council of Europe activities in this field, especially the results of the Project on Human Dignity and Social Exclusion. The desire to tackle the question of access to social protection from a pluridisciplinary angle was reflected in both the terms of reference and the membership of the Group. The CS-PS comprised national experts from several Council of Europe member and observer states1, researchers in the social field2 and representatives of two non-governmental organisations3 and other organisations4. In order to identify and assess concrete obstacles to access to social protection from a pluridisciplinary angle, the Group members decided at their very first meeting to gather as much information as possible on obstacles to access to social protection in the Council of Europe member states. For this purpose they drafted a « questionnaire on obstacles to access to social protection », which was circulated to two types of respondents : bodies responsible for managing social security benefits, social assistance and social services and non-governmental organisations. On the basis of the replies to the questionnaire, Mr. Peter Melvyn, a researcher at the European Centre for Social Welfare Policy (Vienna, Austria), drafted a report, entitled : « Obstacles to access to social protection in Europe ». The guidelines for improving access to social protection which follow are the outcome of the work of the Group of Specialists on Access to Social Protection. They have been supplemented by an explanatory memorandum which summarises the information contained in Mr. Melvyn’s reports which have directly or indirectly inspired the guidelines. The guidelines for improving access to social protection are derived from the information contained in Mr. Melvyn’s report, but also from the pooling of the Group members’ experience in social protection. Throughout their various meetings, the Group CS-PS has, by taking its inspiration partly from the information collected concerning access to social protection, produced concrete proposals aimed at improving access to social protection. For this reason, the guidelines for improving access to social protection which follow often go far beyond the information contained in Mr. Melvyn’s report. I. GUIDELINES FOR IMPROVING ACCESS TO SOCIAL PROTECTION The following guidelines were agreed by the Group of Specialists on Access to Social Protection (CS-PS). Their purpose is to facilitate access to social benefits for those persons fulfilling the conditions of entitlement to these benefits but being confronted with difficulties in asserting their rights. They also aim to facilitate access to social services. They are based on the following general principles: The exercise of a right presupposes knowledge of that right and awareness
1. Improving communication and information about rights, benefits and services a. The public should have all the necessary information available about social benefits and social services; the dissemination of information should be part of the conception of an effective public information policy and of a national information strategy: the dissemination of information should be aimed at all entitled persons and use as many channels of information as possible (brochures sent out to the entire population, television advertisements, provision of brochures in certain public places, free-phone numbers, open days, internet, etc);
b. Entitled persons should be able to exercise their rights easily: benefits claim forms should be concise, appropriate to claimants and easy to complete;
c. The public authorities should pay constant attention to the quality and effectiveness of information: human relations training should be given to service providers;
2. Improving the management and organisation of benefit providers and social services a. The setting up of social protection bodies and social services should be geared to the needs of the entitled persons: the allocation of responsibilities between different bodies and services should be clearly established. This needs to be communicated to all bodies and services concerned;
b. The functioning of social protection bodies and social services should be geared to the needs of the entitled persons: the different bodies and services should co-operate with each other in dealing with entitled persons’ files, while respecting personal data protection;
c. Social protection bodies and social services have a responsibility towards the beneficiaries and should be made aware of this: social protection bodies and social services should work in an efficient way, in particular in terms of time and performance towards this objective;
3. Improving the partnership between social protection bodies, services, NGOs and the other actors of civil society Partnership must be understood in its broad sense: partnership with organisations representing civil society, local authorities, social partners, the private sector, and partnership with entitled persons in order to promote participation and empowerment of these persons. 1. Participation of all actors should be facilitated: participation and expression on the part of individuals in a situation of exclusion should be encouraged, particularly as regards policies and initiatives concerning them;
2. The role of NGOs and other actors of civil society should be recognised and their action should be supported: the existence of NGOs should be legally recognised;
3. Partnership with NGOs and other actors of society should be encouraged: · co-operation between social protection bodies and services on the one hand and NGOs and other actors on the other hand should be promoted, thus fostering interaction between the social protection system and the voluntary sector;
1. Improving communication and information about rights, benefits and services The guidelines for improving access to social protection were founded on general principles intended to guide the implementation of measures aimed at facilitating access to social benefits and social services. These general principles are as follows: · The exercise of a right presupposes knowledge of that right and awareness of the entitlement to hold and exercise that right;
The replies to the questionnaire disseminated by the Council of Europe have shown that a lack of information concerning rights, benefits and services in terms of social protection can lead to loss of or to delays in receiving other benefits and services to which a person may be entitled. In some cases, this lack of information may explain the low take-up rate of certain benefits. Even if it is difficult to establish whether the information necessary for exercising a right was not provided, if application procedures are not clear, or whether users are simply not aware of the relevant information, the consequences of this lack of information can, in some cases, have serious repercussions in particular where the person concerned has only limited financial resources. On the whole, official bodies seem to be satisfied with the quality of information which they provide for the public concerning their rights and on application procedures for benefits and services. In their replies to the questionnaire, most countries point to their continuous efforts made in disseminating information through various media (newspapers, internet, numerous information brochures, informative guides, TV advertisements, telephone). However, some recognise that they have difficulty in reaching certain ethnic or linguistic minorities or particular groups such as migrant workers. On the other hand, the vast majority of NGOs are critical of the information provided by government sources. Their main criticisms are aimed at: the fragmentation of the information disseminated (reflecting the complexity of the organisation of the social protection system); general inadequacy (inaccuracies or mistakes in the information material, failure to keep information up-to-date); imbalance in the quantity of information on different benefits (for example, plenty of information on pension schemes but much less on means-tested benefits) and finally, the inadequacy of the adaptation of the information to all categories of society: people of a low educational level, ethnic or linguistic minorities and migrants, disadvantaged groups and the disabled (especially the hard of hearing and those with poor sight). These replies indicate that the information disseminated is not always accurate, up-to-date and accessible to all and that certain groups of people seem to remain, still, beyond the range of the dissemination of information. Furthermore, according to the questionnaire replies, the information on social benefits and services presented and disseminated by public bodies, often appears to be addressed to a public which is already familiar with the functioning of benefit systems. Often couched in legal and bureaucratic terms, the majority of information documents are comprehensible only to policy makers and staff responsible for the administration of the services. If this makes access difficult for many ordinary people, persons with literacy problems for example, or those belonging to certain minorities face a great obstacle. Thus, a considerable number of questionnaire replies admit that the public has difficulty in understanding completely the information addressed to it concerning social benefits and services. Furthermore, most government services and NGOs see counselling and assisting clients with application procedures as one of their main functions. There is also unanimity over the fact that benefits should be easy to apply for and to administer: they should be easy to understand, as much for those who apply for them as for those who provide them, especially for those employees within the relevant organisations who have the task of communicating this information to the public. Some replies to the questionnaire indicate that the rules governing applications are often so difficult to understand that they alienate many potential claimants. It is obvious from many examples provided at national level, that the fact that the forms are so long and complex constitutes a major obstacle to access to social protection. 2. Improving the management and organisation of benefit providers and social services Most replies to the questionnaire recognise that the definition of responsibilities of each of the bodies forming the network of social protection is not always as clear as might be desired and that this constitutes a major difficulty for those entitled to benefits. The same goes for the distribution of responsibilities within and between social protection bodies (and management levels) and therefore, the definition of their responsibilities and obligations. Several correspondents note that the greater the complexity of the social protection system, the more difficult the distribution of tasks and responsibilities. This situation is further complicated in countries making the transition to a market economy, as their social protection systems are still considered as being in flux and therefore not entirely structured. Mention is also made of the grave difficulties faced by federal states in transition where a decentralisation process has been initiated without the authorities expected to provide the services being given the necessary resources. The areas of social assistance and social services seem to be those where the greatest amount of friction occurs owing to the lack of clarity in the definition and distribution of power and responsibilities. Yet this problem is not unique to former centrally controlled economy countries. Replies from states with consolidated social protection systems deplore the fact that the social protection to which citizens are entitled is provided by a number of different administrative services and complain of the ensuing absence of an integrated system of service delivery. While, generally speaking, entitlement to one benefit or service does not exclude the right to another benefit or service (where the beneficiary fulfils any eventual requirement conditions), exclusion from one benefit rarely gives access to another. In practice, the application for benefits, especially means-tested ones, must be made separately, even though the information which must be provided with each claim is often basically the same. In order to remedy such situations, various countries have introduced measures for improving the administration of benefits and services which aim to provide the client with an integrated service, for example by the setting up of ‘one-stop-shops’ to counter the fragmentation of tasks and responsibilities. Respondents to the questionnaire also recognise that the office buildings of the social protection and social service bodies are not always, for various reasons, accessible to all those entitled to benefits. The reasons cited concern first of all the geographic reach of the social protection network: thus, the access of people in rural or geographically isolated areas to social protection is often problematic, regardless of the country’s geographical location in Europe and the size of its territory. However, climatic conditions such as the long and severe winters increase difficulties in north-eastern Europe. In many countries, the dense networks of service points facilitate access to social benefits and services and in others, notably those with large sparsely populated areas, contact is maintained by telephone, post, fax and email. The difficulties experienced by the elderly and the handicapped in gaining access to social services are mentioned in many of the replies to the questionnaire. Particular difficulties encountered by such persons concern the use of public transport and access to official buildings, which, for the most part, are not equipped to receive people with impaired mobility, the elderly or persons with young children. To remedy this situation, certain countries have set up home visiting services to assist in providing information and advice on applications for benefits. Many countries have also introduced legislative measures to guarantee accessibility for disabled persons, these measures apply to new buildings and, in certain countries, to the adaptation of existing buildings whose physical characteristics constitute a barrier to access. The majority of countries which, in reply to the questionnaire, provided information on the qualifications and training of the staff working in social protection organisations, recognised that, for various reasons, there was a lack of qualified personnel. It was also recognised that if the requirements in terms of qualifications vary from one service to another within the same organisation, the qualifications required for each post are not always clearly defined. Several countries rely on permanent training programmes for their staff, without there being necessarily any obligatory follow up of the employees concerned; other countries deplore the lack of the necessary resources to offer employees the possibility of continually improving their qualifications. For example, some replies pointed out the lack of staff trained in modern social work methods. Others mention that even where social workers have specific training, the low level of pay does not contribute to raising the level of qualifications within the profession.6 It was recognised in the replies to the questionnaire that staff often lack precise knowledge regarding other benefits and services and are for that reason unable to guide the user towards obtaining a different benefit or service. This general informative role is often taken on by independent information services (NGOs and others) who have a better overall view of the system of social protection in their country. The question of the quality of reception is mentioned in numerous replies to the questionnaire. It is closely linked to the level of qualifications of the service providers. Furthermore, the role of reception staff is extremely important, particularly for persons in vulnerable situations. Whilst it is recognised that the role of reception staff as a point of contact between the individual and the administration is important, and that a negative experience at this stage can create a feeling of vulnerability, several replies confirm that the interpersonal skills training of reception staff is inadequate and that such training does not always form part of the training programmes available to staff. The attitude of reception staff to clients is often described as being indifferent or condescending. This issue is closely linked to that of stigmatisation or social discrimination, whether real or perceived, which corresponds according to the replies to the questionnaire to two situations: that of so-called marginalised groups or individuals (AIDS sufferers, drug addicts, homeless persons, single mothers and also, according to many replies, persons with mental health problems or even physical handicaps) and that of the beneficiaries of non-contributory social assistance, including also sometimes the recipients of unemployment insurance pay. It is interesting to note that certain replies, both from governmental and other sources, report the widespread and deep-rooted attitudes in their societies that everyone should be able to assume responsibility for supporting him/herself and his/her family without outside help. The feeling of stigmatisation is also widespread in the transition countries, especially amongst those who formerly enjoyed a higher level of social and economic welfare. Where doubts are expressed concerning the quality of reception, references are also made to the adverse working conditions of the reception staff, to the poor state of waiting rooms or the lack of privacy in these areas. The improvement in the quality of reception is on the agenda of many national social protection administrations. The examples given in the replies to the questionnaire aim at offering reception staff specific training in interpersonal skills and specially adapted training programmes for reception staff dealing with certain groups (eg. migrants). In several cases mediators have been appointed to ensure the smooth flow of administration. The services of interpreters, or even in some cases people from the same background or country of origin as that of the migrants in question, have also been called on in order to facilitate communication. This is all the more important as several countries have mentioned in their replies to the questionnaire that certain categories of persons or certain groups are either excluded from various benefits or services or have difficulty in gaining access to them, for example those persons in situations of irregularity (particularly illegal immigrants), asylum seekers, refugees and certain indigenous groups. 3. Improving the partnership between social protection bodies, services, NGOs and the other actors of civil society The report drawn up further to the questionnaire is based on information provided by government authorities and also by non governmental organisations working in the field of social protection raises, by its very nature, the question of the relationship between the two sides. On the one hand, these relations have become more complex in the past few decades because of growing individualisation, the decline of traditional family structures and the increasing diversification of populations due to large-scale migration. On the other hand, communication and co-operation between public services and the different civil society actors have steadily improved with the growing awareness of the limitations and difficulties encountered by the State in creating and putting into effect a complete system of social protection. NGOs and other civil society actors operating in the social field occupy an area between the public and private sectors and exist because of a social need which, for various reasons, is not provided for as it should be. In contributing to the provision of social protection, they fulfil, according to the replies to the questionnaire, a variety of functions ranging from provision of information on benefits and services and advice on applications for benefits, campaigning for social rights, acting as advocates for individuals and groups (for example in appeal cases), experimenting with new approaches (for example in the case of certain social services) or acting as constructive critics towards the administration as well as providing feedback on the current situation and how this is perceived by society. Because of the long tradition of voluntary engagement in western Europe, its welfare states have always been able to rely on the participation of civil society actors and thus on the role played by voluntary organisations. This role is played mostly at a national and local level – though international NGOs have gained considerable importance – often acting as intermediaries between citizens and the State. Even though the financial resources, power relations and political influence of the NGOs vary greatly, they all contribute to highlighting the needs of certain categories of the population and eventually to the adoption of new policies or legislation in the social field. The examples provided in the replies to the questionnaire show the importance of voluntary engagement which, in the social field, contributes to reinforcing the action of the State. In central and eastern European countries, the political changes of the past decade have encouraged many citizens to become involved in voluntary work, to defend causes which they feel to be important. The number of NGOs has risen considerably in many of these countries, but, most are, at best, tolerated by governments and rarely seen as partners. Replies to the questionnaire show that this phenomenon, already significant, continues to expand, as much in western Europe as in countries of central and eastern Europe. This partnership favours the development of a consultation-oriented approach of beneficiaries and potential beneficiaries. One of the main aspects of this approach is to facilitate the access to social benefits and services. The replies to the questionnaire indicate several trends: decentralisation of the delivery of services to small-scale, locally based units (this point is particularly important for those who are tied to their immediate environment because of limited mobility or domestic commitments), changes in the way services are supplied and the provision of integrated services for clients. |
Print 
Send 
FRANCAIS 