GOLD Report I - UCLG

149dic countries it is the responsibility of municipalities,as it is still to a large extent inthe United Kingdom. In Italy, education isoutside the domain of regional authorities.Public safety responsibilities are also devolvedto local governments in many, thoughnot all, European countries. In Belgium, theNetherlands and the United Kingdom publicsafety by tradition is an important responsibilityof the mayor or other local authorities.By contrast, in Germany, Hungary and Sweden,public security hardly appears at all inthe remit of local governments.In the Eastern European countries, responsibilityfor education and health varies considerably,even within individual nationsover time. In Bulgaria for example, managementof the health system and the schoolswas first assigned to municipalities, butwas returned to the state level in 2003. InAlbania, these tasks have been financedout of the state budget since 2003, eventhough the local councils administer thestaff payroll. In Hungary, Lithuania, Polandand Romania, the management of schoolsand education staff is decentralized. InEstonia, Latvia, the Czech Republic, SlovakRepublic and Slovenia, on the other hand,it is divided between the state and localgovernments, the state retaining responsibilityfor staff management.Movement toward centralization can beseen in several countries in the areas ofeducation (United Kingdom), health(Norway) and public safety (Belgium,Netherlands). However, in many othercountries local councils are getting moreinvolved in education, as well as publicsafety. Previously, local councils in thesecountries had had only limited administrativeresponsibilities in these areas. Athird approach is favoured in the Netherlands,Sweden and the United Kingdom:enlisting the private sector. In these threecountries, management reforms focusedon attracting the private sector have reducedthe remit of local governments.III.3.Administrative capacityAdministrative capacity depends on thehuman resources and style of management,both of which have undergone importantchanges in the past few years.III.3.1. Human resourcesThere are substantial differences in the staffinglevels of local governments. Unsurprisingly,these differences reflect those alreadynoted for the powers and responsibilities:countries in which local government and particularlymunicipalities manage both essentialpublic services and the human resourcesthey require, are the countries with the higheststaff levels. In the Nordic countries,Switzerland and the United Kingdom, localgovernment staff represent about 80% of thetotal for public sector employees (63% inNorway). These employees for the most partwork in education and the health services.Despite an extensive range of functions, localgovernments in Eastern Europe have farlower staffing levels (around 40%), except inHungary (69%) and Slovak Republic (90%)(CNFPT: 2005; Pollitt / Boukaert: 2004).The political structure of a state hardlyimpinges on these staffing issues. In fact ittends to be in unitary states that we findthe proportionally highest levels of staffemployed by local governments. For themost part, levels of employment for localgovernments are similar: for example theyare 28% in Germany, 31% in France, 24%in Spain, 34% in Belgium, 19% in Italy and18% in Portugal. Federal states and stateswith autonomous regions, for their part,are distinguished by the lower staffinglevels of their central civil service. Localstaffing is also comparatively low becausethe bulk of their human resources areemployed at the regional level 18 . The lowerstaffing levels of local governments in Greeceand Ireland also reflect their limitedpowers and responsibilities.In recent years, local governments of manycountries have had to cut staff levels be-18. Pollitt / Bouckaert(2004), p.44 et seq.