The OMC inclusion and national social NGOs: From enthusiasm to ...

sharp. In France, it is more fundamental which has to do with the poor institutionalised linkswith the state and its funding schemes. The government is accused of failing to make povertyeradication a strategic priority of its policy and the objectives mentioned, so NGOs, were notimplemented either through legislation or programmes. More concretely, they criticise that thegovernment would not properly address the two most significant crises, that is those ofunemployment and of (lack of adequate social) housing, but also the cutting-back of theuniversal health scheme (CMU) in 2003. The absence of a clear and precise financial planwhich would allow identifying how much money is spent on a particular policy is criticised asis the insufficient dialogue between NGOs and policy-makers, the shortage of time and thelack of public visibility of the process (EAPN 2003). Evidently, the German reaction is not asfundamental but still severe. Criticism focuses on the newly introduced so-called Agenda2010 and its poverty-enhancing effects which are not dealt with in the NAP, but also the overrelianceon work as a means of integration, simply not available for all people. Further pointsare the absence of policies for the most vulnerable, insufficient gender mainstreaming andconsultation of civil society as well as the absence of concrete target setting, to name onlysome of them (BAGFW / NAK 2004).Finally, the lack of influence of NGOs on the implementation of the OMC inclusion is alsodetectable when looking at the new mainstreamed OMC social protection and socialinclusion. While all NGOs, as well as the French administration, have pled for a continuedseparated OMC inclusion, they did not succeed in rescuing the old OMC and are now dealingwith an OMC that covers such diverse issues as inclusion, health and pensions. The most citedreason for a separate OMC inclusion was the fear that in a streamlined OMC and next to thefinancially powerful issues of health and pensions, poverty and social exclusion matterswould receive even lower attention of the politicians.3.3 Evaluation of OMC inclusion by NGOsHow do the NGOs evaluate the OMC inclusion process? With regard to the poor quality anddegree of the consultation process and the quasi zero impact they had on the NAPs, theirevaluation is amazingly balanced which should be understood in the light of their interest tofurther develop the process. In both countries, more so in France, the understanding is thatthe political leadership had refused to take the NAPs as a reference and even to communicateabout it, thereby showing its lack of political support. The insufficient mobilisation of (all)actors is also often mentioned, more so in Germany than in France. Here, NGOs find that theinsufficient consultation lead to an insufficient incorporation of their views. One interviewee