Albertjan Tollenaar

Social Security as a Public Interest: A Multidisciplinary Inquiry into the Foundations of the Regulatory Welfare state

Why is social security a public interest and how does this reflect on the role of the state? This fundamental question is answered differently by various disciplines. This article gives an overview of an economic, a public administration, a legal and a philosophical viewpoint. It is observed that while social security is strongly associated with the public interest, it is never argued that it is exclusively a state affair. Private arrangements also play a role. With the emergence of the ‘regulatory welfare state’ private and public responsibilities become more intertwined. In order to monitor the success of the regulatory welfare state, it is necessary to be able to measure the extent to which new forms of governance contribute towards realising social security as a public interest. In order to do so, we need, first of all, to gain a deeper understanding of the core principles of social security. These principles should be seen as objectives which should be adhered to whatever choices have been made as to the division of responsibilities between the state and private actors. We also need to gain an understanding of the effects of various regulatory instruments and the way they interact.

Decentralization in Tanzania: Design and Application in Planning Decisions

Every state copes with the question of which level of government should bear responsibility for social services such as health care and education. Tanzania is no exception. The current government infrastructure of Tanzania is based on the principle of Decentralization by Devolution (DbyD) and can be seen as a reaction to previous structures based on centralized de-concentration. This article reviews the decentralization as designed in the DbyD policy and its application in planning decisions by assessing the involvement of local communities in decision making, based on a case study in two primary facilities. The conclusion is that even though policy states a strong decentralized government, in reality central preferences dominate the decision-making. Wishes expressed in local plans are ignored in the planning procedure. The article identifies the factors that contribute to this central influence and concludes with reviewing the value of decentralization policy in Tanzania and other developing countries.

Public Governance in the Dutch Welfare State: The Consequences of Privatisation for Securing Public Interests in the History of the Dutch Welfare State

Since the foundation of the Dutch welfare state in the nineteenth century, the distinction between government and market has been object of discussion. In the first welfare arrangements, the role of the government was subsidiary to that of private initiatives. The churches looked after the poor and the employers and employees developed funds to cover employment related risks. The main idea was that state regulation should not stand in the way of these private initiatives. During the twentieth century the government increased its role in the provision of welfare. The public welfare state reached its peak at the end of the twentieth century. Currently, the Dutch welfare state is confronted with a process of privatisation. We witness the development of a regulatory welfare state.Discussions regarding the optimal mix between public and private elements in the welfare state have played an important role in the design of the Dutch welfare state up until today. Although nowadays the government is the most important provider of social security benefits, private elements are introduced by the privatisation of, for example, the reintegration market and employment related risks. The idea behind this process of privatisation is that it makes private actors more aware of the costs involved with illness and inactivity, which induces them to take preventive measures. In other words, the introduction of private elements in the welfare state is believed to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the system. The shift in balance from government to market does, however, raise questions with regard to the extent to which other public interests are secured. For example, to what extent is the solidarity between employees with a high and low risk of getting ill guaranteed?The consequences of the development of the regulatory welfare state for the securing of public interests are the object of this research. We investigated the development of the Dutch welfare sector into a regulatory welfare state and the public interests that justified the intervention of the government. The question we want to answer is whether or not the regulatory welfare state is capable of securing these public interests.One of the results of our research is that the development of the welfare state is based on conflicting public interests. The public interest that dominates the debate, changes over the years. In the early years of the welfare state, the realisation of income protection was an important public interest. Nowadays the effectiveness and efficiency of public expenses, combined with a high value that is attached to labour participation, dominate government regulation.The development of the regulatory welfare state can be regarded as a response to this shift in public interests. Although in theory, the introduction of private elements in a formerly public welfare system does not have to impair the securing of a wide range of public interests, we show that that the regulatory welfare state is not fully capable of correcting the perverse effects of the private market.

Empathie in het sociaal domein

Aan wetgeving ligt altijd een mensbeeld ten grondslag. Het mensbeeld bestaat uit het geheel aan eigenschappen (voorkeuren, vaardigheden, motieven) van degene die door de wet wordt geraakt of beschermd. De mensbeelden kunnen worden onderscheiden in een drietal dimensies: zelfredzaam, bureaucratische vaardigheden en calculerend gedrag. De analyse van de totstandkoming van de wetgeving in de sociale zekerheid leert dat de mensbeelden van verschillende recente wetten verschillend scoren op deze dimensies. Onduidelijk is waar de wetgever zijn mensbeeld op baseert. Bij wetgeving lijken mensbeelden vooral te worden gebruikt om wettelijke voorschriften te legitimeren. Bij de uitvoering van de wetten blijken weer andere mensbeelden te domineren. Dit is ingegeven door enerzijds meer specifieke kennis van de normadressaat (voorschriften worden niet zo streng gehandhaafd als de wetgever zou willen, omdat de handhaving ongewenste effecten heeft) en anderzijds bezuinigingsdrift (waardoor procedurele barrieres worden opgeworpen die de wetgever niet voor ogen stonden). Dit geconstateerde verschil tussen uitvoering en wetgeving leidt tot de aanbeveling om bij wetgeving meer kennis over de mensbeelden in de uitvoeringspraktijk te betrekken.

Repressive administrative law : assessing culpability in Dutch social security regulation

With the introduction of strict obligations and sanctions in social security, the traditional boundary between criminal law and administrative law seems to fade away. Administrative fines in particular facilitate strict, efficient and effective law enforcement. In spite of the fact that administrative fines are part of administrative law, criminal law safeguards are still applicable. This could cause problems, since administrative authorities and administrative judges are not necessarily familiar with these criminal law principles. This article addresses the question of how administrative authorities and administrative judges assess culpability when deciding on administrative fines in the Netherlands. The main finding is that administrative authorities, and especially municipalities, overestimate the degree of culpability. The case shows that, in the search for more repressive instruments, it is imperative to allow courts to keep an eye on the proportionality of the sanctions.

Het succes van de codificatie van de beleidsregel in de Awb

De codificatie van de beleidsregel in de Awb is gebaseerd op de veronderstelling dat bestuursorganen hun beleid vaststellen in beleidsregels en dat rechters aan beleidsregels zullen toetsen. De keuzes van de wetgever hebben echter ook enkele neveneffecten, bijvoorbeeld ten aanzien van onbevoegd vastgestelde beleidsregels, of beleidsregels die gebreken tonen. In dit artikel wordt nagegaan in welke mate de beoogde doelen zijn bereikt en of de veronderstelde neveneffecten zich voordoen. Geconcludeerd wordt dat bestuursorganen inderdaad in toenemende mate beleidsregels vaststellen, maar dat deze niet altijd voldoen aan de normen die daaraan worden gesteld. De rechter lijkt ook in toenemende mate aan beleidsregels te toetsen. Weliswaar heeft de codificatie geleid tot een toenemende complicatie, maar dat lijkt voor de rechter niet zoveel uit te maken. Voor de rechterlijke toets draait het om het individuele besluit, waarbij de aard van de toegepaste regel minder van belang is. http://www.nall.nl/tijdschrift/nall/2014/01/NALL-D-13-00010

Nut en noodzaak van een algemene codificatie van bestuursrecht

This article on the usefulness of a general codification of administrative law forms the closing contribution of a NALL-special. In this special, various authors have reflected on the successfulness of a broad codification process in 1998, which introduced rules on the notification of decisions, policy rules, subsidies, enforcement and supervision of administrative authorities in the Dutch General Administrative Law Act (GALA). The editors asked the contributors whether the objectives of the rules introduced were met and how the rules turned out to function in practice. In this overarching article, the NALL-editors reflect on the general lessons to be learned for the GALA-legislator. In these lessons they also take into consideration the initiatives for a law of administrative procedure of the European Union.

Participation for Development: Does the Decentralisation Policy in Tanzania Make a Difference?

The question which level of government should bear responsibility for social services, such as health care and education, is relevant in every state. Tanzania is no exception. The current government infrastructure of Tanzania is based on the principle of Decentralisation by devolution (DbyD) and can be seen as a reaction on the previous government structure that was based on deconcentration rather then decentralisation. The aim of the decentralisation policy is to enhance participation of local communities, to support their initiatives and to gain a sustainable development of social services. For this many instruments were developed and implemented. This article reviews the actual implementation of this policy and its success for local development.

Where Public and Private Meet: Income Security for Sick and Disabled Employees in Germany and the Netherlands

Social security is by definition a combination of public and private responsibilities. The result is a mixture of public and private legal systems and instruments, aiming to serve certain public interests. The mixture of both private instruments is expected to provide more efficient, tailor-made solutions that still meet the public interests of reliability, solidarity and equality. This article provides an exploration of the thin line between the public and private in Germany and the Netherlands for social security with regard to income protection for employees who fall ill or who become disabled. The comparison focuses on the distribution of responsibility between employee-employer (private) and employee-government (public), the criteria determining incapacity for work, the thresholds for public coverage and finally on institutions that decide on claims for social security. The descriptions of the German and the Dutch systems illustrate the mixture of public and private instruments and the reasons behind opting for a more public or more private influence. Despite the differences between the two systems they are similar in the way in which they search for corrective measures to remedy the negative effects of both public and private regu-lation.