Opening of the Academy / First Module I – Decentralisation and Democratisation

Venue: Hotel Harmonia, Republic of Albania
Date: 27 February – 1 March 2014

Lecturers:

• Besnik Tahiri, Master of Science in Decentralised Governance and International Development
• Besnik Osmani, Master of Science – American University in Kosovo, Secretary of the Ministry of
• Local Government
• Fatmir Haxholli, Master of Contemporary European Studies
• Arian Galdini, Master of Political Science and Public Policy

Visits to Institutions:

• Ilir Meta, Speaker of the Parliament of the Republic of Albania
• Erion Veliaj, Minister of Social Welfare and Youth

Topics:

• Decentralisation from a historical, academic and research perspective – The International Context of Local Governance and the Development of Local Government
• Fundamental Concepts of Decentralisation: Devolution, Deconcentration and Administrative Decentralisation – Rondinelli’s Principles
• Central Government versus Local Government (relations between the central and local levels)
• Democratisation in Relation to Decentralisation – The Case of Kosovo
• Public Choice Theory – Governance, Institutions and Democracy
• State-Building in Relation to Decentralisation – The Case of the Republic of Kosovo

Mr Besnik Tahiri, Executive Director of KLGI

At the opening of the programme, the Executive Director of the Kosovo Local Government Institute, Mr Besnik Tahiri, stressed that the programme rests on 4 key elements:

• Findings from KLGI’s research and periodic work;
• The assessment of municipalities’ capacity-building needs;
• Methodological and professional support from the University of Birmingham;
• The expertise of international, local and regional lecturers.

According to Mr Tahiri, this will make it possible to combine regional practices and international theories on local government with current developments, including Kosovo’s present needs.
Elaborating on the theories in ‘Theoretical Concepts of Decentralisation’, Mr Tahiri stressed that before a society pursues a policy of decentralisation, there must be at least three preconditions in place:

The first is a high level of central state capacity, because effective implementation of decentralisation requires coordination between levels and more regulation to guarantee basic transparency and accountability; a weak state cannot implement decentralisation successfully. The second requirement is a well-developed civil society.

This matters not only for participation, but also because it can provide additional sources of information and feedback, as well as constructive criticism of local government. The third is a political project in which an organised political force supports decentralisation and ensures its implementation. We should also not forget that effective local governance depends on existing resources that are adequate and sustainable.
Besnik Osmani, Secretary General of the MLGA

The concept of state organisation in relation to local governance, or vice versa. In reality, the 20th century saw both localism and globalisation, the latter as an opportunity for development, e.g. the EU and other international institutions. At the same time, localism required a major political and administrative movement so that power would not move up above the state but down towards citizens;

Thus we have the sub-national concept: for example, in large states we have regions, provinces… that is where administrative power lies, and consequently we see the trend of policies being left to the state while services are left to the regions; the binary concept of state-building has been to have a democratic state while basic functions are left to local self-government institutions. In short, what we are dealing with here is Kosovo joining this trend of European social and political development… this concerns orientation, and not necessarily quality;

The European Charter of Local Self-Government gives us the substance of what local self-government is… our constitution embodies the two basic principles, subsidiarity and transparency. The concept of decentralisation takes two forms: a decentralised system in which, whenever necessary, the state has the final say, and local autonomy, in which, whenever necessary, the municipality has the final say; so the question is whether we have an advanced decentralised system or local autonomy. There is a fine dividing line; the question is how far the state can intervene in a given issue. For example, with the closure of schools in Prishtina, we like to say we have a system of self-government and not local autonomy, but when we are in the mayor’s position and the state intervenes, the question arises whether we have a system of self-government or local autonomy.

Our legislation has reduced state intervention and strengthened the role of the courts: in no case can the government intervene to have the final say; the court does. If we had local autonomy under international rules, this would not be the case, but we have a very advanced system of local self-government. In this sense, the conclusion on this issue is that we have an advanced system of local self-government that stops just short of local autonomy.

We have had a little of everything: for example, decentralisation, where municipalities have autonomous competences that once belonged to the central level; we have also had a deconcentration of power that did not pass into the hands of local bodies – it moved closer to citizens but still remained in the government’s hands to decide finally; this is a form of decentralisation in which authority remains with the government while functional authority remains with the municipality. We also have the privatisation of service delivery: under our legal framework, the public services that must be provided to citizens may be delivered through private services.

Waste collection has been left as a municipal competence; what we have in this case is that the state entrusts a service to a private operator. So, as the private sector grows in a particular area, we move to a form of service delivery that in the modern world has shifted to privatisation. In modern countries the municipality handles administration, while private companies deliver the services. A relationship is established between administration and the economy.

As regards territorial organisation, history knows the concept of the city-state, or what are known as metropolitan areas. They are city-states: if their competences are analysed, we find a state within a state, lacking only matters of sovereignty; but where quality is concerned, city-states were allowed, and they became promoters of the economic development of their states from 1945 to the 1990s. After the 1990s we see a trend in which these city-states became so powerful that they came to endanger the core functions of states; consequently, in order to diminish the power of these city-states, lower levels were introduced, preserving the development trend but breaking up the trend of monopolies. We need locomotives of economic development. Do we need single-tier competences, i.e. the same for Gjilan as for Ranillug… I say no… let us move away from the uniform concept.

Equally important is the balanced distribution of economic and financial resources. Today it is easy to be a mayor because you do not collect 80%, you receive it ready-made… the most important job is collecting it… unfortunately we have remained at a level where 15% is collected at the local level and 85% by the central level… almost 45% of the country’s budget is in the hands of mayors and 55% in the hands of the government.

Mr Besnik Tahiri, Executive Director of KLGI

In his lecture to participants in the “Local Governance Academy” programme, he raised several important issues concerning the explanation of aspects of decentralisation, the principles of good governance, central–local relations, intergovernmental fiscal relations, the clarification of competences and, above all, building continuous communication so as to reduce disagreements between the two levels.

In his introduction he stressed that: ‘The national public good is best served when the local public good is best represented’; the aim of the constitution is to provide competences according to local interests so as to create the sphere of separation of powers; nevertheless, local interests and the national interest will undoubtedly coincide, or sometimes even be in conflict.

Intergovernmental fiscal relations

Fiscal balance between functions and resources at each level; assignment of revenue sources; revenue sharing; grants: block and specific; access to financial credit. Fiscal control: ensuring fiscal sustainability; resources used effectively and efficiently.

Central–local relations include state–local relations in the central system; Formal relations: the legal basis for CG/LG; revenue assignment & intergovernmental transfers; central regulations and controls. Informal relations: political; professional; LG associations; the media, civil society.

Clarifying competences

Defining the general authority of municipalities over matters not regulated and defined for other government bodies; municipalities should push for a strategic review of the laws on intergovernmental finance, natural resources and public enterprises, and on environmental protection, to ensure the clarification/amendment of municipal competences as needed;
The central level should engage in preparing administrative instructions to complement the laws; this should be done in cooperation with municipal leaders in order to incorporate municipal principles into development and to avoid the risk that the functionality of administrative instructions is poorly conceived and lacks clear legal guidance from the central government.

Building mechanisms that reduce disagreements

Developing coordination mechanisms between the MLGA and the relevant ministries for drafting the legal framework, so as to avoid duplication of and conflict with sectoral laws;
Reviewing strategic options for dispute resolution, especially the possibility of the MLGA taking on the primary function of resolving disputes between municipalities and the relevant ministries; regulating follow-up and reporting by the MLGA on the implementation of recommendations given to municipalities;

The MLGA should step up its monitoring and assessment of municipalities as regards the implementation of the law and other acts that regulate or affect local government. He stressed that the citizen’s first encounter with the state and its services is the municipality; when municipalities deliver results, the state succeeds.

Visit to central institutions in the Republic of Albania

Mr Besnik Tahiri, Executive Director of KLGI

At the opening of the meeting, the Executive Director of the Kosovo Local Government Institute, Mr Besnik Tahiri, informed the Speaker of Parliament, Mr Meta, about the programme, the delegation and the purpose of the visit, stressing:
The LGA’s goals focus on supporting local governance and democratisation in Kosovo. More specifically, this programme addresses topics related to relations between the central level (the government) and the local level (the municipality), and the legal framework that governs the functioning of central and local government. Above all, it addresses programmatic issues and policies that stimulate the development of local government and decentralisation in the country.

The programme has 40 members: mayors and deputy mayors and chairpersons of municipal assemblies, while the other participants are at the level of directors and heads of assembly groups. The participants come from 6 municipalities, and the group of officials comes from different ethnicities, parties and regions.
In this respect, KLGI, together with the senior officials participating in the Local Governance Academy, wishes to learn more closely about the successes and challenges you face as institutions. Above all, we wish to learn about your work and engagement, and more precisely about the relations between the parliament and local government.

Mr Ilir Meta, Speaker of the Parliament of the Republic of Albania

I am not the most suitable person to give you knowledge about local governance, as I have never held a role in local government.

I can inform you that the Republic of Albania is currently engaged in an administrative-territorial reform, because Albania has a fragmentation of local units. We have many Communes, many Regions and Municipalities that contribute to this fragmentation; most local units generate no more than 1–3% of their own budget, and the rest must be covered by the central government.

Fragmentation also hinders investment, because to make an investment you need to obtain permission from the Commune, the Municipality and finally the Region. Many local units do not manage to have capacities and staff on certain issues; therefore we are not the best case to learn from about local governance – rather, we should learn from you. We have problems with standards and services, and problems in the development of communes, many of which are passed on to the central government.

We do not need all these employees in local administrations, as the budget is overburdened
; for this reason we must carry out a reform to increase the efficiency of communes by reducing costs and raising the quality of services. The reform will also help to raise the level of sustained debate between local units and central government, and between the government and parliament.

Erion Veliaj, Minister of Social Welfare and Youth

Minister Veliaj first explained the role of the ministry he leads, stressing that this department manages 27% of the budget and is home to 2/3 of the citizens of the Republic of Albania. He then stressed that the ministry he leads covers the welfare network, social and assistance services, the committee on religions, the child protection agency, labour offices, youth affairs and many other areas related to welfare and youth.

We have cut staff by 30% and introduced new practices for allocating social assistance grants, making women (heads of household) the managers; these practices are based on the view that women are better managers when it comes to family demands and needs.
Policies are not what we follow in the news every day; “policy” is about the muscle of the state in regulating the lives of citizens.

Employment – We are working to strengthen the job creation agency, but there is a gap between the qualified workforce in the labour market and absorption capacity.

We are working on upgrading vocational schools, which at the same time are helping to improve the perception and appreciation of every kind of work, so that heavy labour is no longer seen at the margins as “dirty” work; many of those who work in vocational trades treat it as “dirty work, clean money”. We must also break away from employing party militants and move to employing professionals.

We are improving access at labour offices with the concept of “5 minutes to get an answer”. Moreover, this is an investment in what is called “the institution of courtesy”, because for most of us this is the number one institution: if we cannot offer a citizen a job, then at least they should receive a kind word. Our mission is labour-market intermediation, because 80% of the unemployed in Albania are returnees from emigration, each of whom knows at least one trade.

My message is that you should have continuous contact with citizens and look at their requests and needs, because this is the real contact.

Arian Galdini, Master of Political Science and Public Policy

Mr Galdini began his lecture with the quotation: “to reach power you must put on the political cloak, but to exercise it you must take that cloak off. There is no public policy that satisfies all citizens, but a good public policy should achieve the maximum satisfaction of citizens”.
He went on to compare consolidated democracies with the Balkan states that aspire to become such. “In consolidated democracies it is the will of decision-makers that is bought, not votes through clientelism. Political decision-making in the Balkans is directed towards informal groups, and as a result public policy finds it difficult to address citizens’ interests.

The public is cut off from this process. Every decision taken in the Balkans carries the dark shadow of informality”, he explained to participants. As a concrete example he took road construction from 2001 to 2009, which both Albanian governments had seen as a priority. “Most of the roads were financed by the European Union, but in the end they were built below standard! They were used as propaganda to win elections, but when it comes to the public everything is different. Reality on paper and reality in practice are two things that do not match”.

Mr Galdini also explained the importance of transparency and decision-making in public policy, taking the example of the recent protests against chemical weapons in Albania. “What was missing in public communication with citizens was confronting citizens with reality. They said ‘No’ out of ignorance and fear. This was the largest popular (not political) protest since the 1990s, and the government did not communicate with citizens. But once the decision was taken, they told the crowd that we had lost a good opportunity. Citizens are then left in a dilemma and ask themselves ‘what if we had accepted’, and posing the question this way reflects a lack of transparency by the government, political propaganda and a politics of dilemmas; yet public policies are not policies of dilemmas. This is where citizen participation in decision-making is cut off”, said Mr Galdini.

Arian Galdini also gave a critical view of public policy in the Balkans, identifying who is to blame for why it cannot be called public. “Unfortunately, public policy in the Balkans is a violation of the citizen by the state, thereby damaging the very atom of citizenship. Politicians face citizens only for economic gain and not for social impact. When politicians regard their service as a favour, that is where public policy ends. Service is their duty, because citizens are the taxpayers from whom they receive their salaries. Arrogant officials who regard their offices as fiefdoms cannot develop public policy”, was Mr Galdini’s criticism addressed to political officials.

At the very end, the lecturer gave his full message on what public policy should be. “Public policy becomes public when the politician’s vision is in close communication with the public. Public policy begins with ‘I’ but ends with ‘we’. In a democracy, the citizen must become a co-author in drafting long-term policies, because a key element of good policy is its longevity. Public policy must build a sense of community. When you draft a policy, the beneficiary should not be just one group of citizens but an entire community.”