NOVOSIBIRSK FORUM
Speech: Mrs.Elita Cakule, Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities
Ladies and gentlemen, dear colleques
First of all I would like to thank you for the possibility to take part in the Forum .......and share the Norwegian experience of local and regional self-governemnt on the inter-municipal cooperation. I am also authorised to bring the best regards from the President of the Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities Mr.Halvdan Skard to the Association of the Siberian and Far East municipalities and to all participants of the Forum.
Norway has a two tier-system of local governement: the municipalities and the county authorities. There are 431 municipalities and 19 county councils. The municipalities and county authorities have the same administrative status, whereas central government (regional governor) has the supervision authority of municipal and county administration.
Norway has about 4,6 mill inhabitants. Both the municipalities and the county authorities vary significantly regarding size, topography and population. The largest region in square km is the smallest, counted in population. And the other way round. Population of municipalities varies from 213 in Utsira to 530 000 inhabitants
in Oslo. Hence, there is not one typical Norwegian municipality or county. Despite such differences, all municipalities and all counties are given most of the same rights and the same responsibilities.
The main competences of the county council’s are today the responsibility of upper secondary school, regional development, county roads and public transport, regional planning, business development and culture.
The Norwegian municipalities are responsible of primary and lower secondary school, kindergartens, care for the elderly and disabled, social services, local planning, agricultural issues, environmental issues, local roads and harbours. The municipalities are close to the citizen, and they are the foundation wall of local democracy. Their responsibilities are competences that are crutial in the welfare system.
These figures illustrate the main sources of revenue for municipalities which are taxes, general grants, earmarked grants, charges and fees.
At municipal level education and elderly care are the two sectors which account for the highest expenditure. At county level - education and public roads and transports acounts for the highest expenditure.
Income in local governement sector amount 17,8% of GDP in continental Norway. Employees in local government sector amount 20% of all employees in Norway.
This shows that local governement has a hihg share of the national economy of Norway. But still - municipalities face a tougher financial framework and dilemmas as several costly welfare reforms have been implemented in Norway in the last decades. We see a clear shift from a collectivistic attitude towards the services provided by the welfare state to a more individually based claim of adjusted services. This explains the on-going discussion on the necessity of regional and local reform in Norway as well as constant necessity for modernisation and efficiency improvement in the local government sector in Norway.
The important and popular efficiency improvement method in the local governement in Norway is intermunical cooperation.
The driving forces for the intermunicipal cooperation:
- Municipalities have a difficult economic situation. A large number of the municipalities are too small to provide the cost efficient services to the inhabitants: (Tasks can be unsolved or solved with lower quality).
- Very few specialists are dedicated to each task. It is difficult to recruit new emplyees in specialist fields.
Most common cooperation fields are
Waste management, Water and sewerage
Fire security/emergency centrals
Business/ tourism development
Audit
Procurement
Cultural activities
Even joint Adminstration
Some counties of Norway have established common political arenas,
Two have even decisions on objectives of amalgamation.
The two counties of Trøndelag have an ongoing cooperation with its “city engine”, Trondheim, with common planning agreed between the three.
In Oslo and the capitol area, an intermunicipal cooperation is established between more than 50 municipalities and the closest county councils.
As one of the reports of 2006 made by one of the research institutions shows: there are about 1400 intermunicipal cooperation constalations and in avarage there is 14 different type of intermunicipal cooperation pr a Norwegian municipality
The process hasn’t been without challenges and difficulties. One of them is a democratic challenge. The councillors experience lack of knowledge and an overview over the intermunicipal cooperation agreements their municipality is a part of. There are many different alternatives of organizing the cooperation – the challenge is to choose the right one.
The council of the cooperating municipalities cannot bind up the council in the other municipalities. The coopetion between counties meets critics in the municipalities for processes not including the local level in sufficient degree.
An other important factor is that almost all Norwegian municipal councils have involved themselves in discussions of amalgamation. The result is in large extent status qou speaking of borders, but increased intermunicipal cooperation. But an important result is the opinion of many municipalities: there should be a parallel discussion of regionalisation and municipal structure.
The Confederation of Norwegian Enterprise (NHO), the Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities (KS) and the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs are working together to improve the skills among Russian managers and civil servants, and build new contacts between Norwegian and Russian businesses and local and regional authorities. During the year 2006, approximately 30 young Russian managers and civil servants will receive training in market economy, business management and local governance, as well as practical managerial experience in Norway. The project is part of an extensive international programme – The Presidential Initiative.