Principles of Public Administration: Concepts and Categories

1. Principles of Public Administration: Concepts and Categories Notes by Dimitrios V. Skiadas, LLB, MJur, PhD Professor on European Governance Dept. of International and European Studies University of Macedonia

2. What is Public Administration? • Is it a discipline? Profession? Field? Focus? Enterprise? Or, what? • Public Administration throughout the world is intricately intertwined with state development, its whole and parts, its past, present and future. • Thus, Public Administration can only be understood within the peculiar, nation-state context. • In Europe literally the State makes Public Administration • In the United States, the reverse can be said to be true: Public Administration makes the State

3. Public administration is both an academic discipline (ie field of study) and a field of practice (ie occupation); • There is much disagreement about whether the study of public administration can properly be called a discipline, largely because of the debate over whether public administration is a subfield of political science or a subfield of administrative science. • As a discipline, Public Administration analyses the mechanism to implement government policy and it prepares civil servants for this work; • As a field of practice, it entails the management of policies so that government can function;

4. Definitions • Public administration has no generally accepted definition, because the scope of the subject is so extended and so debatable that it is easier to explain than define. Some definitions are: • “The management of public programs" • “The translation of politics into the reality that citizens see every day" • “The study of government decision making, the analysis of the policies themselves, the various inputs that have produced them, and the inputs necessary to produce alternative policies” • According to the North American Industry Classification System, adopted by the USA Government, Public Administration comprises establishments primarily engaged in activities of a governmental nature, that is, the enactment and judicial interpretation of laws and their pursuant regulations, and the administration of programs based on them.This includes legislative activities, taxation, national defense, public order and safety, immigration services, foreign affairs and international assistance, and the administration of government programs, etc. All these are activities purely governmental in nature.

5. Until the mid-20th century and the dissemination of the German sociologist Max Weber's theory of bureaucracy there was not much interest in a theory of public administration; • The field is multidisciplinary in character; • Among the various proposals for public administration's sub-fields, six pillars have been identified, including human resources, organizational theory, policy analysis and statistics, budgeting and ethics. • In an more academic approachthe study of public administration is defined as a program that prepares individuals to serve as managers in the executive arm of local, state, and federal government and that focuses on the systematic study of executive organization and management. • It includes: instruction in the roles, development and principles of public administration; the management of public policy; executive-legislative relations; public budgetary processes and financial management; administrative law; public personnel management; professional ethics and research methods.

6. Historic Course • Dating back to Antiquity, Pharaohs, Kings and Emperors required pages, treasurers, and tax collectors to administer the practical business of government. • Prior to the 19th century, staffing of most public administrations was rife with nepotism, favoritism, and political patronage, which was often referred to as a spoils system. • Public administrators have been the "eyes and ears" of rulers until relatively recently. In medieval times, the abilities to read and write, add and subtract were as dominated by the educated elite as public employment. • Consequently, the need for expert civil servants whose ability to read and write formed the basis for developing expertise in such necessary activities as legal record-keeping, paying and feeding armies and levying taxes. As the European Imperialist age progressed and the militarily powers extended their hold over other continents and people, the need for a sophisticated public administration grew.

7. The eighteenth-century noble, King Frederick William I of Prussia, created professorates in Cameralism in an effort to train a new class of public administrators. The universities of Frankfurt an der Oder and University of Halle were Prussian institutions emphasizing economic and social disciplines, with the goal of societal reform. Johann Heinrich Gottlob Justi was the most well-known professor of Cameralism. Thus, from a Western European perspective, Classic, Medieval, and Enlightenment-era scholars formed the foundation of the discipline that has come to be called public administration. • Lorenz von Stein, an 1855 German professor from Vienna, is considered the founder of the science of public administration in many parts of the world. In the time of Von Stein, public administration was considered a form of administrative law, but Von Stein believed this concept too restrictive. Von Stein taught that public administration relies on many pre-established disciplines such as sociology, political science, administrative law and public finance. He called public administration an integrating science, and stated that public administrators should be concerned with both theory and practice. He argued that public administration is a science because knowledge is generated and evaluated according to the scientific method.

8. In the United States of America, Woodrow Wilson is considered the father of public administration. He first formally recognized public administration in an 1887 article entitled "The Study of Administration." The future president wrote that "it is the object of administrative study to discover, first, what government can properly and successfully do, and, secondly, how it can do these proper things with the utmost possible efficiency and at the least possible cost either of money or of energy”. • Wilson was more influential to the science of public administration than Von Stein, primarily due to his 1887article, in which he advocated four concepts: • Separation of politics and administration; • Comparative analysis of political and private organizations; • Improving efficiency with business-like practices and attitudes toward daily operations; • Improving the effectiveness of public service through management and by training civil servants, merit-based assessment;

9. The separation of politics and administration has been the subject of lasting debate. The different perspectives regarding this dichotomy contribute to differentiating characteristics of the suggested generations of public administration. • The separation of politics and administration advocated by Wilson continues to play a significant role in public administration today. However, the dominance of this dichotomy was challenged by second generation scholars, beginning in the 1940s. Luther Gulick's fact-value dichotomy was a key contender for Wilson's proposed politics-administration dichotomy. In place of Wilson's first generation split, Gulick advocated a seamless web of discretion and interaction. • By the 1920s, scholars of public administration had responded to Wilson's solicitation and thus textbooks in this field were introduced. A few distinguished scholars of that period were, Luther Gulick, Lyndall Urwick, Henri Fayol, Frederick Taylor, and others.

10. Frederick Taylor (1856-1915), another prominent scholar in the field of administration and management also published a book entitled ‘The Principles of Scientific Management’ (1911). He believed that scientific analysis would lead to the discovery of the ‘one best way’ to do things and /or carrying out an operation. This, according to him could help save cost and time. Taylor’s technique was later introduced to private industrialists, and later into the various government organizations . Taylor's approach is often referred to as Taylor's Principles, and/or Taylorism. It consists of main four principles: • Replace rule-of-thumb work methods with methods based on a scientific study of the tasks; • Scientifically select, train, and develop each employee rather than passively leaving them to train themselves; • Provide detailed instruction and supervision of each worker in the performance of that worker's discrete task; • Divide work nearly equally between managers and workers, so that the managers apply scientific management principles to planning the work and the workers actually perform the tasks.

11. Taylor had very precise ideas about how to introduce his system (approach). It is only through enforced standardization of methods, enforced adoption of the best implements and working conditions, and enforced cooperation that this faster work can be assured. And the duty of enforcing the adoption of standards and enforcing this cooperation rests with management alone. • The new generation of scholars, such as Luther Gulick, Lyndall UrwickHenri Fayol, Fredrick Winslow Taylor, Paul Appleby, Frank Goodnow, and Willam Willoughbyno longer relied upon logical assumptions and generalizations about human nature. • Gulick developed a comprehensive, generic theory of organization that emphasized the scientific method, efficiency, professionalism, structural reform, and executive control. He summarized the duties of administrators in an acronym; POSDCORB: Planning, Organizing, Staffing, Directing, Coordinating, Reporting, and Budgeting. • Fayol developed a systematic, 14-point, treatment of private management.Using private management practices for administrative sciences and thus establishing a single, generic management theory andbluring the borders between private and public sector, was thought to be possible. In this theory the focus was on governmental organizations.

12. The mid-1940s theorists challenged Wilson and Gulick. The politics-administration dichotomy remained the center of criticism. In the 1960s and 1970s, government itself came under fire as ineffective, inefficient, and largely a wasted effort. The costly American intervention in Vietnam along with domestic scandals including the bugging of Democratic party headquarters (the 1974 Watergate scandal) are two examples of self-destructive government behavior that alienated citizens. • Even before that, the citizens called for efficient administration to replace ineffective, wasteful bureaucracy. Public administration would have to distance itself from politics to answer this call and remain effective. Elected officials supported these reforms by establishing academic schemes to provide consulting services to all levels of government (i.e. the Hoover Commission chaired by Prof.Louis Brownlow, to examine reorganization of government, which was developed into the Public Administration Service-PAS) . • Concurrently, after World War II, the whole concept of public administration expanded to include policy-making and analysis, thus the study of ‘administrative policy making and analysis’ was introduced and enhanced into the government decision-making bodies. Later on, the human factor became a predominant concern and emphasis in the study of Public Administration.

13. Henceforth, the emergence of scholars such as, Fritz Morstein Marx with his book ‘The Elements of Public Administration’ (1946), Paul H. Appleby ‘Policy and Administration’ (1952), Frank Marini ‘Towards a New Public Administration’ (1971), and others that have contributed positively in these endeavors. • Public administration was being defined as a department in the executive arm of government responsible for the formulating and implementation of government policies and programmes. • In the late 1980s, yet another generation of public administration theorists began to displace the last. The new theory, which came to be called New Public Management, was proposed by David Osborne and Ted Gaebler in their book Reinventing Government. The new model advocated the use of private sector-style models, organizational ideas and values to improve the efficiency and service-orientation of the public sector. • During the Clinton Administration (1993–2001), Vice President Al Gore adopted and reformed federal agencies using NPM approaches. In the 1990s, new public management became prevalent throughout the bureaucracies of the US, the UK and, to a lesser extent, in Canada.

14. Some modern authors define NPM as a combination of splitting large bureaucracies into smaller, more fragmented agencies, encouraging competition between different public agencies and encouraging competition between public agencies and private firms and using economic incentives lines (e.g., performance pay for senior executives or user-pay models. • NPM treats individuals as "customers" or "clients" (in the private sector sense), rather than as citizens. • Some critics argue that the New Public Management concept of treating people as "customers" rather than "citizens" is an inappropriate borrowing from the private sector model, because businesses see customers are a means to an end (profit), rather than as the proprietors of government (the owners), opposed to merely the customers of a business (the patrons). In New Public Management, people are viewed as economic units not democratic participants.

15. Inthelate 1990s, JanetandRobertDenhardtproposed a newpublicservicesmodelinresponsetothedominanceof NPM. A successorto NPM isdigitaleragovernance, focusingonthemesofreintegratinggovernmentresponsibilities, needs-basedholism (executingdutiesincursiveways), anddigitalization (exploitingthetransformationalcapabilitiesofmodern IT anddigitalstorage).Oneexampleofthisisopenforum.com.au, anAustraliannon-for-pronvitespoliticians, seniorpublicservants, academics, businesspeopleandotherkeystakeholderstoengageinhigh-levelpolicydebate. • AnothernewpublicservicemodeliswhathasbeencalledNewPublicGovernance,anapproachwhichincludes a centralizationofpower; anincreasednumber, roleandinfluenceofpartisan-politicalstaff; personal-politicizationofappointmentstotheseniorpublicservice; and, theassumptionthatthepublicserviceispromiscuouslypartisanforthegovernmentoftheday.

16. Current views on Good Administration by public bodies: •  1. Getting it right • Acting in accordance with the law and with regard for the rights of those concerned. • Acting in accordance with the public body’s policy and guidance (published or internal). • Taking proper account of established good practice. • Providing effective services, using appropriately trained and competent staff. • Taking reasonable decisions, based on all relevant considerations. • 2. Being customer focused • Ensuring people can access services easily. • Informing customers what they can expect and what the public body expects of them. • Keeping to its commitments, including any published service standards. • Dealing with people helpfully, promptly and sensitively, bearing in mind their individual circumstances. • Responding to customers’ needs flexibly, including, where appropriate, co-ordinating a response with other service providers.

17. 3. Being open and accountable • Being open and clear about policies and procedures and ensuring that information, and any advice provided, is clear, accurate and complete. • Stating its criteria for decision making and giving reasons for decisions. • Handling information properly and appropriately. • Keeping proper and appropriate records. • Taking responsibility for its actions. • 4. Acting fairly and proportionately • Treating people impartially, with respect and courtesy. • Treating people without unlawful discrimination or prejudice, and ensuring no conflict of interests. • Dealing with people and issues objectively and consistently. • Ensuring that decisions and actions are proportionate, appropriate and fair.

18. 5. Putting things right • Acknowledging mistakes and apologising where appropriate. • Putting mistakes right quickly and effectively. • Providing clear and timely information on how and when to appeal or complain. • Operating an effective complaints procedure, which includes offering a fair and appropriate remedy when a complaint is upheld. • 6. Seeking continuous improvement • Reviewing policies and procedures regularly to ensure they are effective. • Asking for feedback and using it to improve services and performance. • Ensuring that the public body learns lessons from complaints and uses these to improve services and performance.

19. What are the Principles of Public Administration? • By studying Public Administration, either as an academic or as an practitioner, one may identify a constant evolving process ofdeveloping the national, European and international administrative legal orders and administrative practices. • And this evolution is characterised by a significant degree of convergence among these factors. • There are several driving forces for this, such as economic pressures fromindividuals and firms, regular and continuous contacts between public officials of Member States and,finally and especially, the jurisprudence of the Courts at national, European and international level. Although constitutions and subsequent legislation convey general law principles and define standards foradministrative actions, it is the courts that refine those standards, i.e. define levels of acceptability forpublic administration practices on a case-by-case basis.

20. Traditionally, standards of administrativeperformance have been defined and refined within the national boundaries of sovereign states. • They havebeen the products of national constitutional arrangements, law-making activity of national parliaments,decisions of national administrative authorities and rulings of national courts. • In the EU context, as well as the international context, these processes are becoming increasingly supranational, thus formulating sharedmandatory administrative standards, that should be adhered to. • However, stressing the harmonising potential of public administration standards is not to say thatadministrative institutions should be homogeneously set up across all states. • The importantmessage is that, independently of institutional arrangements, national public administrations mustrecognise principles and adhere to certain common standards.

21. In some countries the administrative law principles, setting standards and inspiring the behaviour of civil servants, usually appear scattered among different pieces of legislation ranking from the constitution to several acts of Parliament, and specific pieces of delegated legislation as well as case law of the courts dealing with litigation concerning public administration. • Other countries have put in force general codification on administrative procedures, which gather and attempt to systematise many of these principles. • These administrative principles are not simply ideas based on goodwill; they are embedded in institutions and administrative procedures at all levels. • Actors in the public sphere are legally obliged to comply with these legal principles, which must be upheld by independent control bodies, systems of justice and judicial enforcement, parliamentary scrutiny, and by ensuring opportunities for hearing and redress to individuals and legal persons.

22. Administrative law principles and civil service are at times difficult to define. Frequently they seem to contradict each other in a given situation. (i.e. Efficiency seems to be at odds with due process; professional loyalty to the government seems to oppose professional integrity and political neutrality; discretionary decisions might seem to go against the rule of law, etc) • This elusive nature of administrative law principles is one of the reasons why “blank concepts” are so common in administrative law and civil service regulations. This is also one of the reasons why the courts , at national, European and international level, are so often invoked to solve conflicts and to continually refine these definitions in a doctrinal construction, adapted over time. • Perhaps it is useless, and even counterproductive at times, to aim to clearly define the boundaries of administrative law principles. • In terms of law-making, when such an attempt has been made, usually in the form of very detailed casuistic distinctions, the end result has frequently been more confusion. Confusion in this domain easily generates injustice.

23. Exacerbated attempts to ensure detail in regulating such elusive matters tend to result in inconsistency and contradiction. Contradiction and discrepancy also cause difficulties in making these principles actual by adversely affecting law enforcement. • From the perspective of law making it is probably considered wise to resort to “blank concepts” because of their malleability to fit in disparate situations. • From the standpoint of civil servants’ and public authorities’ behaviour, relying on common sense and seeking inspiration from consolidated case law doctrine would be advisable.

24. The “Administration Through Law” Context • This administrative context is made up of several factors, the more important of which are: • • The quality of substantive regulatory law: Regulatory law provides the framework for decision-making within a given policy field (for instance, in urban planning or on environmental issues). In other words, it represents a tool for officials and a source of information and prediction for the public. • • The quality of procedural administrative law: Procedural administrative law provides due procedures for administrative decision-making, for co-ordination and for balancing powers, for officials’ relations and communication with the public, and for enabling any interested party to be heard or to appeal. • • The quality of financial and administrative accountability and control mechanisms: These work for transparency, provide checks for financial and administrative decision-making, and provide means for correction, prosecution and redress.

25. At the same time, these three factors provide the legal values and principles which contribute decisively to shaping the attitude and behaviour of public managers and the rest of the civil servants operating within that administrative context. • These legal principles will be essential as guiding principles for decision-making and behaviour; they will reduce the likelihood of arbitrary decisions by allowing discretionary decision-making within the legal administrative framework. • In the end, the principles of administrative law will strongly contribute to laying the foundation of a professional public administration. • The professionalisation of the public administration is, therefore, a much wider task than implementing civil service regulations and introducing personnel management improvements. • If the administrative context within which officials have to work is not also improved, they might still have to make arbitrary decisions, with insufficient communication with the public, and insufficient co-ordination with other institutions, even if they are in a situation where they have been selected on merit and are exposed to systematic training.

26. Civil Service Values are Legally Binding Principles • The civil service is bound by the principles enshrined in constitutional arrangements and in administrative law. From this viewpoint, it can be said that civil service values are legal values. Legal values are not the same as ethical values, even if they can broadly overlap. Ethical values are guides for action, and their breaching deserves social reproach. Legal values, when breached, have legal consequences through the civil service law’s disciplinary provisions. Civil servants are bound by the administrative principles established in legislation. • Civil Servants are not Mere Employees of the State • Civil servants are subject to legal principles and compulsory rules that derive from their specific location within the hierarchical structure of the state. This location shapes a profession, which deals with fundamental rights of their fellow citizens. Civil service regulations do not simply regulate the working relationships between an employer and its employees, as labour law does. Civil service regulations intend, a) to protect civil servants in performing their very special social role in democratic societies and, b) to tighten professional standards by virtue of the delicate issues which civil servants have to deal with. Civil servants are actors within the public sphere of society, the sphere which falls within the domain of public law.

27. Administrative Law Principles Create Civil Service Behavioural Patterns • Nevertheless, a civil service system regulated by a civil service act is not sufficient to make a public administration professional, efficient, effective, impartial, abiding by the rule of law, and well-performing. It is also necessary to have substantive and procedural administrative legislation of sufficient quality. This legislation will not only provide civil servants with an important tool for performing their duties and for realising the public law principles described above, but also with clear procedures to guide their work and to render their actions and decisions predictable. • Additional procedural and substantive legislation is also needed to ensure sufficient internal and external control of public administration and the civil service, particularly in terms of public finance, quality control, procedural supervision, and above all, to ensure an independent, well-functioning judicial system able to effectively redress administrative actions and decisions by means of appeal. This requirement is not only for the sake of the legal certainty and reliability of public administration, but also to ensure the appropriate legal protection of individual rights and legitimate expectations.

28. PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION • The PA principles have been divided into six categories (OECD): • Strategic Framework of Public Administration Reform • Policy Development and Co-ordination • Public Service and Human Resources Management • Accountability • Service Delivery • Public Financial Management • These Principles are not a checklist to be applied mechanically. Public bodies should use their judgment in applying the Principles to produce reasonable, fair and proportionate results in the circumstances.

30. Strategic Framework of Public Administration Reform Principle 1:The Government has developed and enacted an effective public administration reform agenda which addresses key challenges. • 1. There is a coherent vision of public administration reform shared by the key stakeholders, including the challenges, objectives, and key steps required for improvement. • 2. Public administration reform is identified among the priorities in all key medium-term planning documents (Government Work Programme, Ex-pose of the Prime Minister, medium-term budgetary framework and Statement of Government Priorities). • 3. The scope of public administration reform planning documents is complete and covers all necessary reform areas; reforms in different areas are clearly linked. • 4. The objectives and steps identified in planning documents are fully consistent with the Government’s priority statements. • 5. Public administration reform objectives and the major steps to achieve these objectives are consistently applied and referenced in other planning documents that are relevant to implementing this policy (e.g. European integration strategies and plans).

31. 6. One or more planning documents adopted at the Government level establish clear implementation plans for public administration reform, as a whole or for different parts of public administration reform. • 7. Public administration reform planning documents include key reforms and development activities and avoid including ongoing and daily activities which do not lead to improvements. • 8. To ensure enactment of public administration reform, planning documents contain all the necessary information,i.e. policy objectives and performance indicators, actions and costs, responsible institutions, implementation deadlines and monitoring and evaluation requirements. Principle 2: Public administration reform is purposefully implemented; reform outcome targets are set and regularly monitored. • 1. Reform objectives and targets are set in planning documents.

32. 2. Planning documents that translate Government public administration policy feature a set of performance indicators (aligned with objectives) that monitor implementation progress or reform failure. • 3. Performance indicators are measurable, relevant to the objectives and support accountability arrangements between institutions and responsible managers. • 4. A data collection system for all identified indicators used in public administration reform provides ministers and officials with timely and accurate data. • 5. Public administration reform progress reports are conducted at least every other year, made publicly available and a basis for discussion over implementation in political and top administrative level. • 6. Functioning central steering and strategy review processes are in place. • 7. Civil society and the business community are involved in the monitoring and review process and enabled to provide inputon implementation performance and reform challenges.

33. Principle 3: Financial sustainability of public administration reform is ensured. • 1. The actions or reform measures established in the planning documents contain information on the (human and financial) resources required toimplement them. To ensure they are sustainable, additional expenditure needs are broken down into temporary and permanent costs. • 2. To ensure the reform is sustainable, the cost appraisal of reform measures defines the share and source of donor assistance and expected financing from Government revenues. • 3. The medium-term budgetary frameworkacknowledges public administration reformas one of the Government priorities and sets out the approximate amount of resources available for this reform. This amount is in line with the budget allocated to public administration reformeither in central planning documents or in the separate public administration reform strategy. • 4. Financial estimations of costs of any reforms requiring European Unionassistance are in line with the relevant EU Regulations.

34. Principle 4: Public administration reform has robust and functioning co-ordination structures at both the political and administrative level to steer and manage the reform design and implementation process. • 1. At political level, there is a formalised discussion and decision making forum (regular Government meetings can also play this role) dedicated to public administration reform management that meets regularly to review progress and initiate required changes. • 2. To support the discussion and decision making at the political level, there is a formalised administrative co-ordination structure. This handles operational public administration reform management issues, provides regular reports on progress in reform implementation, identifies obstacles to progress and devises possible ways to overcome them. • 3. All key public administration reform stakeholders are represented in the co-ordination structures. Non-governmental organisations with relevant competence and capacity are consulted regularly. • 4. The functions and responsibilities of both political and administrative level management and co-ordination structures are clearly defined and observed. • 5. The secretariat functions to support managementand co-ordination structures are carried out by the institution/ministry with the legalresponsibility for overall co-ordination of the reform.

35. Principle 5: One leading institution has responsibility and capacity to manage the reform process; involved institutions have clear accountability and reform implementation capacity. • 1. Regulation(s) designate one institution with overall responsibility for leading and co-ordinating public administration reform policy and implementation and the lead institution has the capacity to carry out its responsibilities. • 2. Division of functions and responsibilities between institutions involved in implementing public administration reform should be clear and there should be no duplication or overlap. • 3. Institutions involved in implementing public administration reform are aware of their functions and responsibilities and have the capacity to carry them out. • 4. Officials responsible for managing and co-ordinating public administration reform are experienced; they have knowledge of, and skills in, communication, team work, conceptual thinking, analytical thinking, creative thinking, development, planning and organisation and receive regular training.

36. Policy Development and Cooperation Principle 1: Centre of government institutions fulfil all functions critical to a well-organised, consistent and competent policy making system. • 1. Legislation assigns functions to centre of governmentinstitutions, with the authority and capacity to implement them, as follows: - co-ordination of preparation of the Government sessions; - ensuringlegal conformity; - co-ordination of preparation and approval of the Government’s strategic priorities and work programme; - co-ordination of the policy content of proposals for Government decision, including defining the policy preparation process and ensuring coherence withGovernment priorities; - ensuringthatpolicies are affordable and co-ordination of public sector resource planning; - co-ordination of the Government’s communication activities to ensure a coherent Government message; - monitoring ofthe Government’sperformance to ensure the Government collectively performs effectively and keeps its promises to the public; - handlingrelations between the Government and other parts of the State (President, Parliament); - co-ordination of European integrationaffairs.

37. 2. When implementing assigned functions, institutions issue guidelines, conduct quality control and provide advice to ministries, the Prime Minister and the Government and act in a unified manner. • 3. Putting inplace arrangements –such as written procedures, institutionalised co-ordination forums and regular formal and informal meetings Principle 2: Clear horizontal procedures for governing national European integration process are established and enforced under the co-ordination of the responsible body. • 1. The legislative and/or regulatoryframework clearly defines and differentiates the powers, responsibilities and obligations of the different parties that carry out the integration function relevant to the phase of European Integration and is aligned with the general legal framework setting the basis for the work of the Government and the Administration. • 2. European integrationco-ordination body(ies) have the authority and capacity to co-ordinate and plan the transposition and translation of the European Unionacquis, European Unionassistance and overall European integration policy. • 3. The European integrationco-ordination unit is institutionalised, in the Office of the Prime Minister, in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or as a separate body, and functions as part of the normal governing apparatus with the authority to facilitate conflict resolution.

38. 4. A firm mechanism is in place to ensure that co-ordination of general relations with the European Unionis in line with overall European integrationco-ordination. Principle 3: Harmonised medium-term policy planning, with clear whole-of-government objectives, exists and is aligned with the financial circumstances of the Government; sector policies meet the Government objectives and are consistent with the medium-term budgetary framework. • 1. The legal framework sets requirements for planning the policy output of the Government;establishes the status of key Government planning document(s), delegates the policy planning function to a centre of government body and regulates its implementation. • 2. The mechanisms are in place (preferably the medium-term and annual work plans of the Government) for translating the Government’s political programme into administrative actions. • 3. Government planning processes and documents enable categorisation, prioritisation across the whole-of-government, as well as at the sector level, and ensure realistic planning in line with Government priorities, the administration’s capacities and financial circumstances. • 4. Clear guidelines are given to the ministries on providing input to the central planning documents and reporting on implementation.

39. 5. Government central planning documents are coherent and consistent both with each other and with individual sectors’ strategic documents in terms of content, development and the monitoring process. • 6. The system for planning sector strategies is formally established; centre of government guides the development process and ensures coherence between sector strategies and quality control. • 7. Sector strategies include financial assessment (budgetary costs and planned European Union assistance) that is consistent with the medium-term budgetary framework. Principle 4: A harmonised medium-term planning system for all processes relevant to European integration exists and is integrated into domestic policy planning. • 1. A medium-term planning and monitoring system for European integrationpreparations is established, enabling consistent planning of all European integration-related commitments. • 2. Theplanning process of different national plans for European integration is streamlined; plans are coherent and avoid duplication. • 3. European integrationplanning is co-ordinated with processes for preparing and enforcing domestic policy planning, in particular with regard to strategic frameworks like the Government Work Plan and the medium-term budgetary framework.

40. Principle 5: Regular monitoring of the Government’s performance enables public scrutiny and ensures that the Government is able to achieve its objectives. • 1. The centre of government reviews progress through a regular and co-ordinated process. • 2. Processes are in place to measure Government progress in meeting stated policy objectives including outcomes of Government work. • 3. Regular reporting takes place on implementation of the Government Work Plan and other central planning documents, if any; the reporting process is coherent and includes clear reference to institutional responsibilities in terms of delivery. • 4. Annual reports on the Government performance are publicly available and open for parliamentary scrutiny. • 5. Monitoring of the implementation ofEuropean Integrationcommitments is integrated into the overall mechanism for monitoring the Government’s commitments and obligations (e.g. the Government work programme, the legislative programme). • 6. The monitoring system includes reporting to the Government on the implementation of sector strategies and enables systematic and objective assessment of their design, implementation and results.

41. Principle 6: Government decisions are prepared in a transparent manner and based on the administration’s professional judgement; the legal conformity of the decisions is ensured. • 1. The legal framework establishes clear procedures for preparation, follow-up and communication onGovernment sessions and sets a clear authority for the centre of government to provide its professional judgement and ensure legal conformity. The centre of government has the capacity to set and enforce the procedures. • 2. A centre of governmentbody sets clear deadlines for the preparatory process allowing sufficient time for consultation and quality control. All stakeholders follow those deadlines. • 3. A centre of governmentbody has the authority and capacity to ensure a policy proposal’s coherence with Government priorities and previously announced policies. • 4. A centre of governmentbody has the authority and capacity to review the content of proposals against set requirements. • 5. The Secretariat for Legislation or the Government Office’s legal unit has the authority and capacity to review and provide comments on all legal drafts before they are discussed and approved in the Government session. • 6. The Government Office is authorised to return items to the ministries if the substance is flawed or inconsistent with Government priorities.

42. 7. The agenda and materials for the sessions are circulated to the participants in advance and on time. The agendas of formal Government sessions are public. • 8. Decision records are kept and distributed after the sessions. Government decisions are made publicly available. • 9. The Government Office communicates to the public regularly and transparentlyon the work of the Government,i.e. its objectives, key decisions and performance. Principle 7: The Parliament scrutinises government policy making. • 1. Systematic procedures are in place and applied in practice to co-ordinate the Government’sdecision making process with the Parliament. Information about the Government’s legislative activities is made available to the Parliament annually in line with the parliamentary planning calendar. • 2. Specialist legislative committees are fully engaged in carrying out their oversight function. • 3. Committee processes and procedures are in place and followed in practice to enable Parliament to debate, scrutinise and amend draft legislation. • 4. Parliament plays a role in ensuring that the legislation enacted is clear, concise and intelligible. • 5. The Government has established procedures and capacity for communicating with the Parliament and follows these procedures.

43. 6. Ministers participate in the work of the Parliament when issues under their responsibility are being discussed. Principle 8: The organisational structure, procedures and staff allocation of the ministries ensure that developed policies and legislation are implementable and meet Government objectives. • 1. The relevant rules of procedure and other legislation establish the structures and responsibilities of the ministries and departments responsible for policy development. • 2. As a general rule, the key policy making functions remain in the ministries and are not transferred to subordinate bodies. • 3. Clear boundaries exist between departments/units and other ministries with regard to policy development, legislative drafting and implementation responsibilities. • 4. The relevant rules or procedures reflect ministries’ responsibilities for medium-term policy and legislative planning, including planning financing and other implementation aspects. • 5. The management of policy development and legislative drafting within ministries, the managerial levels responsible for these functions and the manner in which responsibility is delegated are clearly established. • 6. The institutional framework and distribution of staff reflects the workload of ministry departments

44. Principle 9: The European integration procedures and institutional set-up form an integral part of the policy development process and ensure systematic and timely transposition of the acquis. • 1. The legal framework establishes a clear procedure, and determines the responsibility of line ministries and other Government bodies, for transposing the acquisand setsrequirements for the transposition process. • 2. The acquistransposition process forms an integral part of the overall Government policy development process, with clearly defined responsibilities for all relevantstructural units regarding planning, co-ordinating and monitoring, and ensures conformity with the Constitution and national legal system. • 3. All Government bodies responsible for transposition regularly use tables of concordance in the transposition process. • 4. The relevant laws, regulations and statutes assign clear obligations for interministerial consultation at the specialist, management and political levels; those obligations are rigorously followed. • 5. The interministerial co-ordination structure is robust andenables conflict resolution during the policy development and the acquistransposition process. • 6. Responsible departments co-operate closely with other policy co-ordination and legal departments; distribution of duties between co-ordinating departments is clear.

45. Principle 10: The policy making and legal drafting process is evidence-based and impact assessment is regularly used across ministries. • 1. The legal framework establishes the types of analytical processes and the requirements and standards expected of line ministries. • 2. Clear and transparent methodologies and criteria define the issue/problem and analyse the potential impacts (benefits, costs and anticipated effects) of both new and existing policies and legislation. The analytical approach is proportionate to the complexity of the issues under analysis. • 3. The analyses are based on relevant and up-to-date data. • 4. Policy options are costed and the outputs of the analysis clearly indicate the source(s) of funding for the proposed policy, linking the anticipated cost of the measures and the medium-term financial planning process. The proposal is affordable within current budgetary agreements or an explanation forany deviation and need for additional funding is provided. • 5. There is clarity about responsibility over day-to-day guidance and quality assurance of the analyses and the responsible institution(s) fulfil(s) established responsibilities. Where several institutions share this role, line ministries clearly understand their respective roles. • 6. Mechanisms for monitoring implementation, to evaluate progress and identify obstacles to successful implementation of the policy and concrete pieces of legislation are routinely identified within the analyses.

46. Principle11: Policies and legislation are designed in an inclusive manner that enables the active participation of society and allows for co-ordinating perspectives within the Government. • 1. Procedures are in place to enable effective public consultation and are applied across ministries, allowing non-governmental organisations and citizens to influence Government policy. • 2. Opportunities for comment and involvement by stakeholders are timed to enable genuine dialogue and the potential to affect policy development with clear information to consultees on the issues and questions at stake. • 3. Public consultation mechanisms and procedures include prior notification to those likely to be affected by the policy changes and other stakeholders, e.g. non-governmental organisations, the private sector and advisory bodies, these procedures are consistently followed in consultation process. • 4. Ministries have sufficient time and resources to analyse and use consultees’ responses. • 5. The Government liaises effectively and holds constructive discussions on the manner in which consultees’ views have shaped and influenced policy and the Government’s final decisions. • 6. The procedures and structures for consultation on proposals between ministries operate effectively, discuss not only the process but substantive matters, to enable the development of policies and legislation that complement the existing system, and include reporting on the outcome of the interministerial consultation.

47. Principle 12: Legislation is consistent in structure, style, and language; legal drafting requirements are applied consistently across ministries; legislation is made publicly available. • 1. Processes and guidelines are in place and applied to ensure the coherence and quality of legislative drafting to encourage making laws simple and easy to understand. • 2. The guidance details draft formalities and arrangements, including how to enact and commence laws and transitional issues. It helps drafters develop primary and subordinate legislation. • 3. A continuing education programme (e.g. training, mentoring) is in place. Its European integration curriculum includes legal transposition issues and ensures drafters remain technically competent. • 4. Procedures are in place to make legislation readily accessible including the fulfilment of formal responsibilities for monitoring publication and availability of laws to the public. • 5. Administrative guidance, documents, directives, interpretation bulletins or other rules that do not have the force of law, but have a practical impact, are clear and easily available to businesses and service suppliers. • 6. A register of laws in force, including consolidated versions of legal acts, is available to the public. • 7. Laws and any explanatory materials, e.g. guidance for those affected by legal changes, are available electronically.

48. Public Service and Human Resource Management Principle 1: Thescopeofpublicserviceisadequate, clearlydefinedandappliedinpractice. • 1. Thereis a clearlegalbasis (i.e. lawoncivilservice, lawsonconstitutionalbodies, lawsonspecialtypesofcivilservice) establishingthehorizontalandverticalscopeofthepublicservice. • 2. Thehorizontalscopecontainsatleastthepositionswithpublicauthoritytoexercisepowersconferredbypubliclawandwithresponsibilityforsafeguardingthegeneralinterestsofthestateorotherpublicbodiesinthefollowinginstitutions: - ministriesandadministrativebodiesreportingdirectlytotheGovernment, thePrimeMinisterorministers, i.e. thecivilserviceatthelevelofcentraladministrationstrictlyspeaking; - administrationsoftheParliament, thePresidentandthePrimeMinister; -otheradministrativebodiesatthelevelofcentraladministration, iftheyareincludedinthescopeofpublicserviceintermsofthepublic/civilservicelaw; - constitutionalandotherindependentbodiesreportingtotheParliament. • 3. Theverticalscopeclearlydeterminestheupperandlowerdivisionlinebetweenpoliticalappointees, publicservantsandsupportstaff.

49. 4. The material scope establishes all general provisions relevant to the employment relations of public servants and management of public service. • 5. Public servants are distinguished from political appointees, i.e. political positions are not included in the scope of public service. • 6. The scope of public service is applied in practice as established in the legal framework. Principle 2: The policy and legal framework for a professional and coherent public service is established and applied in practice; the institutional set-up enables consistent and effective human resource management practices across the public service. • 1. There is adefined policy in the framework of the relevant strategies (e.g. government programme, public administration reform strategy) for public service development, with clear and coherent measures in place to support its implementation. • 2. Primary and secondary public service legislation is in line with the administrative law principles: reliability and predictability (legal certainty),openness and transparency, accountability, efficiency and effectiveness. • 3. The general provisions of the public service law are applicable to the special types of public service (e.g. police, prison, defence, foreign service) and staff of the constitutional bodies, or the general provisions and principles of the laws of the special types of public service and constitutional bodies are principally similar to the general provisions of the public service law.

50. 4. The degree of regulation in the primary and secondary legislation is adequately balanced to allow flexibility and ensure stabilityof the public service. • 5. Public service policy,and primary and secondary legislationenacting it,are applied in practice. • 6. Political responsibility for the public service is clearly established. • 7. A central co-ordination unit, sufficiently empowered and capable of leading, supporting and monitoring the implementation of the values, policy and legal framework of the public service is in place. • 8. A human resourcemanagement information system to support the strategic workforce planning, management and monitoring of human resource management practices in the public service is in place, including correct and complete data at the level of the entire public service, organisation and individual public servant required by the legislation and enabling statistical information at a given date. This system interacts electronically with other national databases to avoid duplication of data gathering. • 9. Professional and consistent human resource managementservices are ensured across the public service by sufficient capacity to manage the workforce and implement the public service legislation. • 10. Independent oversight of the public service is ensured.