Not only public debt

"Investing in social services despite austerity": it’s the title of a debate held in the European Parliament past March 19, on the initiative of MEP Jean Lambert (Greens, Great Britain), co-organized by Eurodiaconia, that brings together 39 associations from 22 counties, belonging to the Anglican, Protestant and Orthodox traditions. Eurodiaconia promotes projects that encourage solidarity, equality and justice with direct interventions as well as through lobbying and policy proposals. During the debate in Parliament Eurodiaconia presented the report "Policy recommendations for Social Services in Times of Crisis", a survey aimed to show that "Investing in quality social services tackles poverty and social exclusion, and reduces expenditure". Follows a synopsis of the document by SIR Europe (full text can be downloaded from www.eurodiaconia.org).The terms of the issue. The ultimate role of social services is "to enable people to integrate or reintegrate into society, to access and retain employment and offer a route out of poverty and exclusion. In doing so they enable people to fulfill their potential". But a social service needs to be "of quality" to fulfill its mission. By responding to individual needs, they "develop social cohesion and reinforce community". Therefore, "social policy and social expenditures can be seen as productive factors as well as a social protection imperative". In fact, "investing in quality social services, in particular preventive services, reduces in many cases long-term care and therefore reduces expenditure". Not-for-profit organisations often "advocate for the vulnerable in society", thus providing "an added value for the public authorities that fund their work, as any profits generated from public money are reinvested for the general interest". They are usually "founded on values", rather than "short-term interests"; "they often involve volunteers, thereby encouraging civil participation and a sense of solidarity".Political suggestions. On the basis of the experience of its members Eurodiaconia suggests two main tracks to follow by the European Commission and EU Member States. First they must "adopt a long-term vision of the social sector and the well-being of people through investing in accessible social services and an effective social protection system". It is necessary to carry out social impact assessments of austerity measures; include social safeguards protecting social services and social protection systems in the agreements with countries receiving EU and IMF funds to tackle their debt; to simplify access to social protection schemes and social services; to develop a package of objective and subjective indicators that measure societal progress and not just economic development; to promote employment, improve lifelong learning and ensure decent working conditions for effective social and health care services. Second, the Commission is asked to "Recognise and support the role of sustainable not-for-profit social services", through studies on "the added value of these organizations"; to "remind Member States that they agreed to adopt an approach that shifts from curative measures addressing the symptoms of exclusion towards preventive measures as a strategy to improve quality of life and reduce the burden of chronic diseases, frailty and disability". The situation. According to the survey carried out by Eurodiaconia, since 2009 there has been "an increasing demand for debt counselling, emergency financial support, food aid and employment advice". Eurodiaconia members have reported a generally decreasing level of support, "not only in funding but also politically". Not-for-profit organizations have been able to shoulder this situation by highlighting their efforts to adapt through "rationalising their services and increasing their efficiency". The weakest brackets are the migrants, disabled, old people and young people without a job. The dilemma is "to know who has the responsibility to care". Five years since the outbreak of the crisis, the question that policy makers seem to be asking is not "how do we change to a more equal society?", but "how can we reduce the level public debt as quickly as possible?".