November 2009

The General Review of Public Policies

Method, Progress and Outcomes

Mr. Bernard Blanc

Head of International Relations Office

2

Financial indicators

• The public debt and deficit are essentially carried by the Central Government :

Central

Gov.

+

ODAC *

Local

Gov.

(APUL*)

Social

Security

(ASSO*)

All

(APU*)

Deficit

(bn€)

56,4 8,6 0,9 65,9(103,8)

Deficit

(per GDP)

2,9 % 0,4 % 0 % 3,4 %(> 5,6%)

Debt

(bn€)

1145,3 146,7 35,1 1327,1(> 1500)

Debt

(per GDP)

58,7 % 7,5 % 1,8 % 68,1 %(73,9 %)

Debt and deficit in 2008 (estimates for 2009)

Welfare System

35,1 bn€

Local Gov.

146,7 bn€

Central Gov. + ODAC

1145,3 bn€

Public debt (2008)

* ODAC = Organismes Divers d’Administration Centrale (Miscellaneous Central Government Agencies)

* APUL = Administrations Publiques Locales (Local Government)

* ASSO = Administrations de Sécurité Sociale (Welfare System Agencies)

* APU = Administrations Publiques (Public Administrations)

Public spending (2008)

Welfare System

472,2

Local

Government

220,6

Central Gov.

+ ODAC

418,6

3

Financial indicators

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Deficit (per GDP) 3,6 % 2,9 % 2,3 % 2,7 % 3,4 % 5,6 %

Debt (per GDP) 64,9 % 66,4 % 63,7 % 63,8 % 68,1 % 73,9 %

Growth (GDP) 2,5 % 1,9 % 2,2 % 2,3 % 0,4 % -1,5 %

2010

?

?

?

• In 2009, the French GDP amounts to 1950 Bn €.

• The overall public deficit reaches 3,4 % of GDP.

4

The state of public service

5,3 M civil servants

Central Government : 2,5 M (0,3 M military) ;

Local Government : 1,6 M ;

Public Health : 1 M.

An annual increase of the public workforce by 0.8 %

between 1986 and 2006 (+ 1 %)

A decrease of the Central Government workforce

since 2006 :

-15 000 (2007), -22 000 (2008), -30 000 (2009)

A 130 bn€ payroll (45 % of budget, 7 % of GDP)

Welfare System

Local Government

Central Government47%

33 %

20 %

5

State modernisation in France since 1995

• 1995 Interministerial Committee for State Reform (CIRE)

State Reform Agency (CRE)

• 1998 Interministerial Delegation for State Reform (DIRE)

« pluriannual modernisation programs »

• 2003 Delegation for the Modernisation of Public Management and Government Structures (DMGPSE)

Delegation for Users and Administrative Simplifications (DUSA)

Agency for the Development of e-Administration (ADAE)« ministerial reform strategies »

• 2003 Directorate for Budgetary Reform (DRB)

budgetary and accounts reform (Constitutional Bylaw on Budget Acts, 1 August 2001)

• 2005 General Directorate for State Modernisation (DGME)« modernisation audits »

• 2007 Ministry for the Budget gathers Budget Directorate (DB), General Directorate for State Modernisation (DGME) andGeneral Directorate for Public Administration and the Civil Service (DGAFP), all in charge of State modernisation

the « General Review of Public Policies »

6

Objectives of the General Review of Public Policies

• Important challenges ahead, requiring ambitious reforms in order to

achieve a simpler, more accessible and efficient State :

Improve the quality of public services to better customise them to user needs ;

Improve national competitiveness in a global context ;

Reallocate financial resources to better align them with political objectives ;

Increase job satisfaction for civil servants and adapt to new methods and jobs.

7

Objectives : a clear vision of the State and public services for 2012

8

The review of public policies in 7 key questions

What are we doing? What are the needs and expectations of users?

Who should do it?

Which transformation

scenario?

• What are the objectives of public policy?• What services does it provide? What does it

guarantee? What does it help achieve? What does it reform?

• Who are the target beneficiaries and what are their characteristics?

• What scenarios for change will result in more effective public policy at a lower cost?

• How can effective implementation be guaranteed?

• What developments will make it possible to maximise policy resources while ensuring compliance with its objectives and improving the organizational context of the employees?

• How can structures and procedures be simplified?

• Is State funding of this policy justified? • Who should pay?• What co-financing can be considered?

• Does this policy always serve the public interest? • Do the services meet the needs? What are the new

expectations? What new services should be offered? • How have the beneficiaries changed? Who are the

actual beneficiaries? • Does this policy have unintended or windfall effects?

Who should pay?How can we do more

at a lower cost?

Should we continue to do as we have

always done?

• Should this policy be maintained? • Should the objectives be reviewed? • What services should the policy deliver? • How can public policy tools be adapted? Is there need

for a shift in the field of beneficiaries?

1 2

3

4 6 5

7

• Could the policy be implemented more effectively by other players or in other forms?

• Is it up to the State to lead this policy? At what level?

• With what cooperation and links with other public or private players?

9

16 ministerial audit

teams

(team head, inspection corps

members and consultants )

6 audit teams on the

major policies

Specific method – subsequent

attachment to audit teams)

4 interministerial work

groups

Autonomous steering, different from

the audit teams

• Government action abroad

• Official development assistance

• Agriculture and fisheries

• Culture and communication and

group of entities reporting to the

Prime Minister

• Defence

• Ecology, and sustainable

development and spatial planning

• Primary and secondary education

• Higher education and research

• Financial networks

• Justice

• Health – solidarity – sport

• Security

• Immigration and integration

• Interior

• Overseas

• Family

• Health insurance

• Solidarity and poverty reduction

policies

• Housing and urban affairs

• Employment and vocational

training

• Business development

• Human resources management

• Regional administration

organisation

• Central government-local

authority relations

• Simplification of in-house

procedures

+ One specific project: reduction in

the administrative burden on

businesses and local authorities

+ Audit of 20 national operators

+ Accelerators for specific

measures

The method : work organisation

10

The timeframe : the approach is now underway

Launch/Guidelines

Monitoring Committee 1st round

(analyses and intermediate

scenarios)

Monitoring Committee 2nd round

(final scenarios)

July 2007 - August 2007 September 2007 - December 2007 January 2008 - June 2008

Actions for change

Implementation of the reforms decided for the

2009-2011 period, within a multiannual budgetary

framework

Mobilisation of all the stakeholders

2008-2011

Public Policy

Modernisation Council

(12 December 2007)

Public Policy

Modernisation

Council

(11 June 2008)

Public Policy

Modernisation

Council

(4 April 2008)

Council of

Ministers :

1st Progress

Report

December 2008 May 2009

Council of

Ministers :

2nd Progress

Report

11

Public Policy

Modernisation

Council

Monitoring

Committee

Support team

Monitoring Committee

secretariat

PR, PM & Budget Minister (staff)

President of the French Republic,

Prime Minister and ministers.

The Minister for the Budget is

General Rapporteur

Presidential Chief of Staff and

Principal Private Secretary to the

Prime Minister, Messrs Woerth &

Besson, the minister(s) involved,

general rapporteurs for the National

Assembly and Senate finance

committees, and two experts

(Messrs. Parini & Pébereau)

DB, DGME, DGAFP

ROLE: final policy

decision and

validation of reform

scenarios

ROLE: steering and

monitoring of

progress,

assessment of

scenarios,

preparation of

decisions

ROLE: monitoring

of progress,

support and co-

ordination

The method : monitoring by political instances at the highest level

12

Three Public Policy Modernisation Council (CMPP) meetings for 374 decisions

The end of the audit cycle with CMPP3 (11 June 2008)– CMPP1 (12 December 2007)

– CMPP2 (4 April 2008)

– CMPP3 (11 June 2008)

TOTAL: 374 measures

An entire range of measures:

– Structural reorganisations: central government, decentralised administrations and

government agencies ;

– Geographic reallocation ;

– Optimisation of support functions (IT, HR…) ;

– Process optimisation.

13

Ministries are in charge of implementation

• Every minister is fully responsible for the implementation of reforms within his/her remit

– Communication : “Explain the purpose of the reforms” ;

– Organisation : “Ensure that his/her services are in a position to implement them” ;

– Monitoring : “Check that the targets have really been met”.

• A dedicated organisation is set up in each ministry to launch and lead the reforms

– The Chief of Staff is the reference contact. Accountable for the results, he monitors the implementation and oversees the consistency of the measures taken within each ministry ;

– A Project manager is appointed for each measure ;

– A Road map is drawn up for each measure ;

– Each ministry decides on the composition and rules of procedure for its GRPP steering committee.

• The Minister for the Budget, General Rapporteur for the GRPP, is at the head of the entire steering mechanism

– Each minister regularly reports on the progress of reforms within his remit to the monitoring committee ;

– A cross-ministerial support team co-ordinates and measures progress through a GRPP cross-ministerial dashboard ;

– Each ministry’s dashboard is updated monthly.

14

• Presentations to the Council of Ministers made on 3 December 2008 and 13 May 2009

• They provide an update on the progress of the GRPP (green, orange or red lights)

• They are based on :

a systematic review of all ministries ;

a review of all measures adopted by the CMPP assessed through factual criteria in the cross-ministerial dashboard.

Review of the two progress reports (December 2008 and May 2009)

15

Progress reports: from project launch to monitoring progress with “auditable”

criteria – first report

First report - December 2008: Project launch

Project manager

Coverage

Macro-timeframe

Indicator promotion

Indicator definition

Milestones

The project manager is appointed and responsible for achieving

the results

The objectives set by the mandate are in step with the CMPP’s

level of ambition

The macro-timeframe lays down the action plan, in keeping with the

pace and objectives of the CMPP decision

Milestones define the short-term targets

The operational and budgetary indicators measure reform progress

and targets met

The target values for the operational and budgetary indicators and

their multiannual growth paths are promoted

Report available on www.rgpp.modernisation.gouv.fr

16

Progress reports: from project launch to monitoring progress with “auditable”

criteria – second report

Second report – May 2009: Progress

Project launch

Risk control for high-

stake measures

On target

The first report’s six criteria are all validated (updated where

appropriate – including the promotion of the operational and

budgetary indicators)

For the high-stake measures, the control of the main risks is

documented:

- Financial risk

- HR risk

- Technical/legal risk

The timeframe to meet each milestone is respected and the

associated deliverables comply with the set coverage

The level of each operational and budgetary indicator complies

with the progress set for that date (to be confirmed)

17

The GRPP within the ministries

Ministry of Justice – some examples of reform

Redrawing the judiciary map(December 2007)

Re-structuring territorial services (December 2007)

Modernising penitentiary system

(June 2008)

18

The GRPP within the ministries

Ministry of Defense – some examples of reform

Creating a network of 90 defense bases (April 2008)

Setting up an executive board and a ministerial committee in charge of investments (December 2007)

Optimising HR management (July 2008)

19

The GPPR within the ministries

Ministry of the Environment – some examples of reform

Providing the Ministry with a new organisation chart (December 2007)

Gradually removing the competitive engineering activity and reorientating the activities of the scientific and technical network (April 2008)

Assigning a new role to the Agency for the environment and energy regulation (ADEME) as an agency for environmental transition (April 2008).

20

The GPPR within the ministries

Ministry of the Budget – some examples of reform

Merging the DGI and DGCP local networks (April 2008)

Setting up a Public Procurement Agency (December 2007)

Setting up a national agency in charge of civil servants’ remuneration (December 2007)

21

The GRPP within the ministries

Ministry of Higher Education and Research – some examples of reform

Setting up a performance-based funding scheme for universities (April 2008)

Allocating financial resources according to a factual and transparent rule (June 2008)

Il est basé sur l’activité des universités (à hauteur de 80 % des crédits) et sur leurs performances en matière d’enseignement comme de recherche (à hauteur de 20 % des crédits).

Les universités les moins bien dotées au regard de leurs performance et de leur activité voient, en 2009, leurs moyens progresser de 14 %, tandis que les universités les mieux dotées au regard de leur performance et de leur activité voient leurs moyens progresser de 4%.

Setting up a central entity responsible for financing and contractualising with public universities (June 2008)

Le décret d’organisation de l’administration centrale intégrant la création d’un pôle dédié au financement et à la contractualisation avec les universités a été publié.

Il sera doté des compétences nécessaires à sa mission, en particulier en matière de comptabilité analytique et d’analyse de la performance, et ses personnels seront soumis à des règles déontologiques adaptées.

22

Zoom-in on a cross-cutting reform :

Local and regional government reform

Adapting government missions to the challenges of the 21st century– Central government is being reorganised to give the local level the leverage to steer public

policies and concentrate on the priority missions

Improving services for individuals and businesses– Businesses will have a general directorate as their one-stop contact

– The département directorates will be organised in keeping with the public policies rather than by ministerial division

Modernising and simplifying administrative organisation and procedures– The region’s prefect will monitor and oversee the consistency of cross-ministerial action

– The regional government architecture will be simplified and clarified:

• At regional level: the number of structures will be reduced from about 20 to 8

• At département level: from about 12 to less than 5

23

Regional government : restructured to improve public policy steering

The regional level has become the common law level for implementing public policies and steering their local and regional replication.

The Public Finances Regional Directorate (DRFiP) is made up of different services all working to simplify taxpayers’ procedures.

The Regional Directorate for Business, Competition Policy, Consumer Affairs, Labour and Employment (DIRRECTE) – the one-stop shop for businesses, employees and consumers –works in support of an active employment and training policy and the prevention of social insecurity

The Regional Directorate for the Environment, Spatial Planning and Housing (DREAL),created from the merger of three regional directorates, will steer sustainable development policies at regional level

The Regional Directorate for Food, Agriculture and Forestry (DRAAF) is briefed to take up the Ministry for Agriculture’s tasks, with the exception of fisheries

The Regional Directorate for Youth, Sport and Social Cohesion (DRJSCS) will step up government efficiency in the following areas: youth, sport, socio-cultural activities, education and social affairs.

The Regional Directorate for Cultural Affairs (DRAC) is tasked with the Ministry for Culture’s missions

The Regional Health Agency will improve access to higher quality healthcare and will do more to contain spending in this area.

NB: The organisation of the services in charge of education remains the same.

24

From twenty structures to eight

25

Département-level government : services tailored to area and needs

The département level has been reorganised in line with the public’s needs rather than, as in the regions, on the basis of ministerial bounds.

Circulars from the Prime Minister dated 7 July 2008 and 31 December 2008 precisely define the new organisation of the département-level government services.

The Département Directorate for the Territories (DDT) will handle policies with a localised impact on the base made up of the current département directorates for the infrastructure and agriculture (DDEA) and the prefectures’ “environment” services. It will also be the main correspondent for the département units of the DREALs and the DRACs.

The Département Directorate for the Protection of the Populations (DDPP), made up mainly of the current département directorates for veterinary services (DDSV), will be the main correspondent for the département units for competition policy, consumer affairs and fraud control.

The Département Directorate for Social Cohesion (DDCS) will cover the DépartementDirectorate for Youth and Sport (DDJS) and the Women’s Rights Service (SDFE) as well as the social functions assigned to the DDASS (Département Health and Social Services Directorates) and the DDEs (Département Infrastructure Directorates for emergency accommodation facilities and housing under its social function) and the corresponding prefecture departments.

The Public Finances Département Directorate (DDFiP) will cover public accounts, taxes and some of the former Regional Directorate for Industry, Research and the Environment (DRIRE) services.

NB: The organisation of the services in charge of education stays the same

26

From a dozen structures to five

27

General Directorate for State Modernisation :

a three-pillar organisation