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

existing tasks. This seems to have been easier in Germany as the large social NGOs hadalready begun to establish at least half-time jobs related to EU matters. In both member states,the government did not allocate particular resources to this OMC, to programmes, or tohuman resources.With respect to new internal structures, one must divide into two levels. Whereas this OMCdid not lead to new structures within single NGOs (except for the large protestant welfareorganisation in Germany where a working group was set up), new structures have emergedamongst them. This is particularly true for the French case. Here, the landscape of charityorganizations is very broad, often following the principle of autonomy and subsidiarity(historical catholic influences). This variety of welfare stood in the way of effectivecommunication towards the state authorities and towards the European level. This is why in2003 occurred a reorganisation of the respective consultation structures so as to allow formore flexible action towards the state and the EU. NGOs took advantage of the process toproceed to an internal re-organisation, concerning the two main umbrella organizations inFrance, UNIOPPS and EAPN-France 10 , which found a way of close cooperation. WhileUNIOPSS is an organisation of approximately 40 NGOs, which operate nation-wide, EAPN-France often comprises the same national NGOs, but additionally nearly all the social NGOsoperating exclusively locally. Evidently, these often very small NGOs do not have thefinancial and human resources to accompany political processes. This is why it was decidedthat the UNIOPSS commission against poverty would furthermore be open to members ofEAPN-France. The group consists of about 40 persons, meets on a monthly basis and nowalso deals with EU issues. When communicating within France, it uses the logo “Alerte”,when communicating with the EU, the same commission operates under “EAPN-France” 11 .For the French case, it meant a real gain of synergies and the link to the OMC is clearly madeby the president of the working group: ”The NAP was the catalyst for the French NGOs tothink together. We had started a little bit, but this was the strongest catalyst” 12 .In Germany, the restructuring was not as important, but this should not surprise as the largewelfare organisations had already been well organised and connected before. However, theyalso set up a working group particular related to this OMC, and already in spring 2001 (vs.French case: June 2003). The regularity of the meetings varies greatly between monthly10Union Nationale Interfédérale des œuvres et Organismes Privés Sanitaires et Sociaux and European Anti-Poverty Network – France.11 Interviews with the president of the UNIOPSS commission against poverty, 26.1.2004 and with the then inplace President of EAPN-France, 10.6.2004.12 Ibid.