3. EUROPEAN BENCHMARKS IN EDUCATION AND
TRAINING
(24033)
14797/02
COM(02) 629
|
Commission Communication — European benchmarks in education and training: follow-up to the Lisbon European Council.
|
| Legal base: | —
|
| |
| Document originated: | 20 November 2002
|
| Deposited in Parliament: | 29 November 2002
|
| Department: | Education and Skills
|
| Basis of consideration: | EM of 12 December 2002
|
| Previous Committee Report: | None; but see (22667) COM(01) 501: HC 152-vi (2001-02), paragraph 13 (14 November 2001)
|
| To be discussed in Council: | May 2003
|
| Committee's assessment: | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision: | Not cleared; further information requested
|
Background
3.1 This Communication builds on the joint detailed work
programme for the follow-up of the report on the "concrete
objectives" of education and training systems[5]
which we considered in November 2001. The programme was adopted
by EU Education Ministers on 14 February 2002 and endorsed by
the Barcelona Spring European Council in March last year.
3.2 In its Executive Summary to the present document,
the Commission summarises the working methods and instruments
agreed for the work programme, saying that the work programme
"sets out how the open method of co-ordination[6]
will be applied using indicators to measure progress, benchmarks
to set concrete goals and exchange of experiences and peer reviews
to learn from good practice. Progress will be monitored against
agreed indicators expressed as average levels of performance of
(1) the 15 EU Member States and (2) the three best performing
Member States. European benchmarks will be used where feasible
and adopted by the Council."
The document
3.3 The Commission proposes five European benchmarks
for the Council to adopt:
"— By 2010, all Member States should at least halve
the rate of early school leavers, with reference to the rate recorded
in the year 2000, in order to achieve an EU-average rate of 10%
or less.
- By 2010, Member States will have at least halved the level
of gender imbalance among graduates in mathematics, science and
technology whilst securing an overall significant increase of
the total number of graduates, compared to the year 2000.
- By 2010, Member States should ensure that [the] average percentage
of 25-64 year olds in the EU with at least upper secondary education
reaches 80% or more.
- By 2010, the percentage of low-achieving 15 year olds in reading,
mathematical and scientific literacy will be at least halved in
each Member State.
- By 2010, the EU-average level of participation in lifelong
learning should be at least 15% of the adult working age population
(25-64 age group) and in no country should it be lower than 10%."
3.4 In addition, the Commission issues the following
invitation with regard to public investment in education and training:
"The Commission invites Member States to continue to contribute
to the achievement of the Lisbon objective of substantial annual
increases in per capita investments in human resources, and, in
this respect, to set transparent benchmarks to be communicated
to the Council and Commission as the detailed work programme on
the objectives sets out."
(The Commission explains that it did not recommend a specific
benchmark in this area, because the available data were incomplete
and provisional.)
3.5 The Communication echoes the work programme in using
"benchmark" to refer to "concrete targets in relation
to which it is possible to measure progress". It states:
"The Commission has examined whether to translate the proposed
European benchmarks into benchmarks at the national level, in
particular in order to take into account wide performance variations
among Member States.... For reasons of subsidiarity, but also
believing that all Member States should remain mobilized around
ambitious objectives as set by the European Council, the Commission
has at this stage chosen not to do so. However, it is obvious
that Member States with low performance levels will have to make
significantly greater effort than others for the common European
benchmarks to be achieved. It is also clear that Member States
that already have achieved high performance in an area, would
need to make substantial efforts to achieve further improvement."
3.6 The Communication also reminds Member States that
they agreed (in the work programme) to communicate "on a
voluntary basis" any national benchmarks they set with regard
to the European benchmarks.
The Government's view
3.7 The Minister of State for Lifelong Learning and Higher
Education (Margaret Hodge) takes the Commission to task on grounds
of subsidiarity, and tells us that the UK will not agree the "benchmarks"
as proposed. She says:
"Articles 149 and 150 of the Treaty recognise the responsibility
of Member States for the content and organisation of their education
and vocational training systems. The Commission acknowledges this
in the text... Nevertheless the Commission's definition of benchmarks
as 'concrete targets' does not appear consistent with the limited
competence under articles 149 and 150 or with the statement by
the Commission in the Communication that it is primarily for Member
States to take action to follow up the conclusions of the Lisbon
summit. The Commission Communication appears to regard benchmarking
as synonymous with the setting of targets. We do not agree and
oppose any centralised setting of targets for individual Member
States to meet not least because education and training systems
vary widely both between and within Member States in response
to national and regional cultural background, institutional arrangements
and labour markets. The UK Government supports the concept of
benchmarking to share good practice but not to determine or direct
policy."
3.8 The Minister also reports that a Standing Group on
Indicators has been established to look in depth at the development
and feasibility of indicators and benchmarks. She tells us:
"We are concerned that the Commission's communication pre-empts
the conclusions of that group, on which all Member States are
represented and which has yet to reach any firm conclusions. We
believe that the Group should conclude its work before there is
further discussion. We will seek to ensure that there is a common
understanding of the terms 'benchmarks', 'indicators' and 'targets'
which appear to be used without proper distinction in this text."
3.9 The Minister reports that the Commission invites
the Council to adopt the proposed benchmarks by May 2003 at the
latest, so that they can be taken into account in the interim
report on the work programme which is due to be presented to the
Spring European Council in 2004. She considers, however, that
other Member States will both share the UK's concerns and wish
to wait for the Standing Group's conclusions before any benchmarks
are adopted. She reminds us that a Council instrument such as
a resolution or conclusions will be required for Ministers to
adopt these proposed benchmarks.
Conclusion
3.10 Although we recognise the need for Member States
to improve their education and training systems, we agree with
the Minister that the Communication oversteps the bounds of subsidiarity.
We also consider its tone to be bullying, in particular in the
extract quoted in paragraph 3.5 above.
3.11 The problem is highlighted by the equation of
" benchmarks" (usually considered to be performance
management tools based on comparative measurement) with "concrete
targets". This highly questionable definition of "benchmark"
allows the Commission to assume an unduly authoritarian role.
We welcome the Minister's call for a common understanding of the
confusing terms "benchmarks", "indicators"
and "targets".
3.12 We normally clear Commission Communications,
as they are not legislative proposals. However, in this case,
we are concerned to keep in touch with the progress of this initiative.
We will, therefore, keep the document under scrutiny until a related
Council instrument is deposited, or until the Minister writes
to us with information about the planned next steps.
5 (22667)
COM(01)501: see headnote to this paragraph. Back
6 See
Conclusion 37 of the Lisbon European Council (March 2000) for
a description of this process. Back
| 
