Page 91 - RIMD_2012_3
P. 91
Revue de l’Institut du Monde et du Développement | 91
2) The utility of tax equalization at both the European level, for the benefit of
European regions, and at the national level, for “communes” and the coop-
eration between “communes”
We need a European framework to ensure a truly equitable interregional
equalization in the name of territorial cohesion policy, and for the application
of the latter.
However, a national framework is also necessary for an equalization policy
in favour of “communal” or “inter-communal” territories, and that in order to
achieve a more equitable and right double equalization system.
3) Finally, there remain – and it is always a question of means - the public
human resources. Indeed, public servants must be respected, rehabilitated
with respect to their image and social roles. Their social status must be re-
newed as well and, especially, the social representation of their role and use-
fulness.
Finally, the idea that a public servant is a real resource and not a cost should
be also imposed. In this regard, the New Public Management has instructed a
false trial against public servants and, thereby, caused them great harm...
Due to a renewed organisation and to clearly identified means, local authori-
ties will finally be able to surpass the future challenges of public action.
II. The Challenges of Local Public Management
These challenges are twofold: redefining the responsibilities and powers of
local authorities (A) and the logic of results which, according to Janus, has
two sides (B).
A. Defining Role and Responsibilities
1) The European Union and its member States should clarify the goals of
multi-level governance and, moreover, they must explain what they expect
from local authorities…
At a time of economic and strategic decisions related to administrative re-
forms, it is finally curious that this essential debate - in the sense of the word
– was deferred from the field of public action. We should, indeed, and above
all, redefine the boundaries of the “public service” in order to determine the
acceptable amount of taxes to be imposed on civil society.
This movement of thought must be driven from Brussels because the princi-
ple of subsidiarity depends, above all, on a leadership impulse. The European
Union and its member States should define in a more precise and fair manner
the distribution of national and Community powers. This implies, therefore,
RIMD – n o 3 – 2012
2) The utility of tax equalization at both the European level, for the benefit of
European regions, and at the national level, for “communes” and the coop-
eration between “communes”
We need a European framework to ensure a truly equitable interregional
equalization in the name of territorial cohesion policy, and for the application
of the latter.
However, a national framework is also necessary for an equalization policy
in favour of “communal” or “inter-communal” territories, and that in order to
achieve a more equitable and right double equalization system.
3) Finally, there remain – and it is always a question of means - the public
human resources. Indeed, public servants must be respected, rehabilitated
with respect to their image and social roles. Their social status must be re-
newed as well and, especially, the social representation of their role and use-
fulness.
Finally, the idea that a public servant is a real resource and not a cost should
be also imposed. In this regard, the New Public Management has instructed a
false trial against public servants and, thereby, caused them great harm...
Due to a renewed organisation and to clearly identified means, local authori-
ties will finally be able to surpass the future challenges of public action.
II. The Challenges of Local Public Management
These challenges are twofold: redefining the responsibilities and powers of
local authorities (A) and the logic of results which, according to Janus, has
two sides (B).
A. Defining Role and Responsibilities
1) The European Union and its member States should clarify the goals of
multi-level governance and, moreover, they must explain what they expect
from local authorities…
At a time of economic and strategic decisions related to administrative re-
forms, it is finally curious that this essential debate - in the sense of the word
– was deferred from the field of public action. We should, indeed, and above
all, redefine the boundaries of the “public service” in order to determine the
acceptable amount of taxes to be imposed on civil society.
This movement of thought must be driven from Brussels because the princi-
ple of subsidiarity depends, above all, on a leadership impulse. The European
Union and its member States should define in a more precise and fair manner
the distribution of national and Community powers. This implies, therefore,
RIMD – n o 3 – 2012
