The Czech Context
POLIS: Podpora sociálně - integračních politik a služeb
The Czech Context
Social Policy and Social Exclusion
The basic task of state social policy is to act as a mediator and thus guarantee solidarity between its citizens. Social policy is founded on the state’s responsibility to citizens and tax payers, who enable the state to provide necessary public goods including services. The restoration of the market economy initiated by the 1989 collapse of Czechoslovak communism initiated the gradual conceptual change of social policy. A paternalistic (and conspicuously arbitrary) type of welfare was replaced by a more liberal approach which emphasized the need to strengthen the capacity of recipients to decide which type of benefit they wish to receive and its uses. The enforceability of the right of access to welfare was also enhanced.
The present Czech welfare system is relatively complicated and comprises of three sub-systems:
To start describing Czech social policy in relation to social exclusion, it seems crucial to emphasize the post-1989 abolishment of legal provisions regarding the criminal act of parasitism, which practically consisted of forcing citizens to work and binding the state into providing guaranteed job placements of every citizen. The abolition initiated a process leading to the formation of whole communities of the socially excluded, specifically the poorest sections of society and the homeless in industrial centers.
Employment policy as an inextricable component of state social policy is implemented by the network of Labour Offices. Labour Offices (LO), besides providing retraining schemes and keeping track of job vacancies, also run unemployment registers whose function is closely interconnected with the social security system. To be removed from the register due to the failure to fulfil your duties (such as regular contact with the LO) means to cease to qualify for unemployment benefit provision. Most of the unemployed escape such a breach of duties, however, as they rationally accept the steps necessary to remain registered as employment of a kind. Moreover, just as social exclusion cannot be easily equated with poverty, the same applies to long-term unemployment, especially since the practice of illegal employment is widely spread among the unemployed. Social exclusion tends to become self-perpetuating, primarily affecting specific segments of the population (ethnic minorities, particularly the Roma) and consequently assuming characteristics (poverty, unemployment) which tend to be constructed as 'ethnic' or 'typical of the Roma'.
The Czech social system is widely criticized for failing to activate the population, for it tends to produce a disintegrated social strata of beneficiaries who are wholly dependent on welfare transfers and prefer them to the low salaries that their unqualified workforce could earn. The momentary gains easily outweigh potentially higher gains in the distant future, because these cannot be conceived. As descending generations adopt this strategy, the system only manages to maintain the boundaries of the underclass: combining inequalities resulting from low qualification and education achievements, the inability to budget with a low income, long-term unemployment, illegal gainful activities and the development of social pathologies. The present functioning of the social system is hoped to improve by the upcoming (01/2007) legal reform of the minimum subsistence level, social services and social inclusion policy.
As already mentioned, the position of the socially excluded Romani population in Czech society is a problem in its own right. The introduction of Act no. 40/1993 on the gaining and losing of citizenship of the Czech Republic, following the split of the Czechoslovak Federation, has contributed significantly to the formation of this ethnicised section of the socially excluded. A large proportion of the Slovak Roma was prevented from participating in the Czech social system as a result of the requirements of this act, in particular the requirement of five-year impeccability of Czechoslovak citizens born in Slovakia and thus holders of Slovak citizenship (of which they were often unaware), as well as the difficulty of the administrative process of gaining citizenship. This triggered the gradual social exclusion of Slovak Roma. The situation worsened alarmingly in the late 1990s. Their seeking of asylum in Western countries and related international complications and the increase in the number of 'Gypsy' houses and streets led the central public administrative bodies to reflect on the problem and try to design viable measures to ameliorate the situation of the Romani 'community' or 'communities' (terms systematically used by the government). The first government report on the predicament of the Roma in the post-revolution era, the so-called Bratinka Report (unavailable in English), was issued in 1997 and identified the causes of failure in the domains of employment and education. Since then, multiple governmental 'conceptions of Romani integrations' have been devised, targeting the problem with mixed results due to the repeated conceptual conflation of Romani national emancipation or nation-building project with the project of social inclusion.
In 1999, field social work (FSW) was first tested in a pilot programme as a viable instrument of social inclusion. From 1999, the government has been allocating finances for the Programme of field social work in socially excluded communities, which is administered by the Council of the Government of the Czech Republic for Roma Community Affairs and since 2003 also by the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs of the Czech Republic. The budget is intended for FSW both through municipalities and NGOs. Governmental and foreign-policy support for FSW and the enthusiasm of its implementers has led to an expansion of the concept, which has now begun to recognise its limitations. Even though FSW alone can help individuals, it cannot possibly fight social exclusion systemically if it is not interconnected with educational, employment and housing programmes and appropriate local government policies.
This is especially important to stress as gradual decentralization brings with it an increase in the decision-making competencies of municipalities. In regard to social exclusion, these determine the character of the local housing policy in the first place. Local government authorities decide how many social flats (in colloquial terms, as the legal definition of social housing is yet to be passed) to keep and build. They also select the buyers of flats owned by municipalities, set the rules of access to the lease of said flats, and, to a certain degree, define the approach towards bad payers and assess individual applications for flat allocation. In an undesirable case, the local housing policy tends to apply the principle of racial discrimination. When an individual application is assessed on the grounds of the 'race' of an applicant or other subjective criteria, one is identified as a 'Gypsy', 'bad payer', 'asocial person' and is treated accordingly. This means that the application is rejected or executed by granting a flat in a locality generally recognized as 'Romani' or 'the worst'. When there is insufficient capacity of social housing, local housing policy may even lead to development of socially excluded sites with privately owned and overpriced substandard tenement apartments. Such ghettos are out of any kind of public control. Formally, municipalities are also founders of all social facilities such as asylums and so on. Municipalities are comparatively less able to influence the functioning of the social system set up mostly by the state. Nevertheless, to a certain degree they can impact the supply of social services available to their citizens. Local authorities also preside over the process of communal planning, which means they can choose to follow closely the ideal standards for its implementation and to respond attentively to the needs of the socially excluded. Last but not least, they have multiple options of supporting local nongovernmental and nonprofit organizations working in the field of social inclusion.
Considering the wide range of possible individual choices and strategies, the prospect of any broad generalization about municipal policies regarding social exclusion does not seem very realistic. However, what seems clear is that, so far, municipalities and state have not reached much success in fighting social exclusion. This claim is supported by findings of a survey of socially excluded Romani ghettos which was conducted for the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs by Gabal Analysis & Consulting. The findings report on some 330 sites throughout the Czech Republic – substantially more than expected – and indicate their general tendency to increase in number.
The present Czech welfare system is relatively complicated and comprises of three sub-systems:
- The social insurance system (pension and sickness insurance and state employment policy)
- The state social support system
- The social assistance system
To start describing Czech social policy in relation to social exclusion, it seems crucial to emphasize the post-1989 abolishment of legal provisions regarding the criminal act of parasitism, which practically consisted of forcing citizens to work and binding the state into providing guaranteed job placements of every citizen. The abolition initiated a process leading to the formation of whole communities of the socially excluded, specifically the poorest sections of society and the homeless in industrial centers.
Employment policy as an inextricable component of state social policy is implemented by the network of Labour Offices. Labour Offices (LO), besides providing retraining schemes and keeping track of job vacancies, also run unemployment registers whose function is closely interconnected with the social security system. To be removed from the register due to the failure to fulfil your duties (such as regular contact with the LO) means to cease to qualify for unemployment benefit provision. Most of the unemployed escape such a breach of duties, however, as they rationally accept the steps necessary to remain registered as employment of a kind. Moreover, just as social exclusion cannot be easily equated with poverty, the same applies to long-term unemployment, especially since the practice of illegal employment is widely spread among the unemployed. Social exclusion tends to become self-perpetuating, primarily affecting specific segments of the population (ethnic minorities, particularly the Roma) and consequently assuming characteristics (poverty, unemployment) which tend to be constructed as 'ethnic' or 'typical of the Roma'.
The Czech social system is widely criticized for failing to activate the population, for it tends to produce a disintegrated social strata of beneficiaries who are wholly dependent on welfare transfers and prefer them to the low salaries that their unqualified workforce could earn. The momentary gains easily outweigh potentially higher gains in the distant future, because these cannot be conceived. As descending generations adopt this strategy, the system only manages to maintain the boundaries of the underclass: combining inequalities resulting from low qualification and education achievements, the inability to budget with a low income, long-term unemployment, illegal gainful activities and the development of social pathologies. The present functioning of the social system is hoped to improve by the upcoming (01/2007) legal reform of the minimum subsistence level, social services and social inclusion policy.
As already mentioned, the position of the socially excluded Romani population in Czech society is a problem in its own right. The introduction of Act no. 40/1993 on the gaining and losing of citizenship of the Czech Republic, following the split of the Czechoslovak Federation, has contributed significantly to the formation of this ethnicised section of the socially excluded. A large proportion of the Slovak Roma was prevented from participating in the Czech social system as a result of the requirements of this act, in particular the requirement of five-year impeccability of Czechoslovak citizens born in Slovakia and thus holders of Slovak citizenship (of which they were often unaware), as well as the difficulty of the administrative process of gaining citizenship. This triggered the gradual social exclusion of Slovak Roma. The situation worsened alarmingly in the late 1990s. Their seeking of asylum in Western countries and related international complications and the increase in the number of 'Gypsy' houses and streets led the central public administrative bodies to reflect on the problem and try to design viable measures to ameliorate the situation of the Romani 'community' or 'communities' (terms systematically used by the government). The first government report on the predicament of the Roma in the post-revolution era, the so-called Bratinka Report (unavailable in English), was issued in 1997 and identified the causes of failure in the domains of employment and education. Since then, multiple governmental 'conceptions of Romani integrations' have been devised, targeting the problem with mixed results due to the repeated conceptual conflation of Romani national emancipation or nation-building project with the project of social inclusion.
In 1999, field social work (FSW) was first tested in a pilot programme as a viable instrument of social inclusion. From 1999, the government has been allocating finances for the Programme of field social work in socially excluded communities, which is administered by the Council of the Government of the Czech Republic for Roma Community Affairs and since 2003 also by the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs of the Czech Republic. The budget is intended for FSW both through municipalities and NGOs. Governmental and foreign-policy support for FSW and the enthusiasm of its implementers has led to an expansion of the concept, which has now begun to recognise its limitations. Even though FSW alone can help individuals, it cannot possibly fight social exclusion systemically if it is not interconnected with educational, employment and housing programmes and appropriate local government policies.
This is especially important to stress as gradual decentralization brings with it an increase in the decision-making competencies of municipalities. In regard to social exclusion, these determine the character of the local housing policy in the first place. Local government authorities decide how many social flats (in colloquial terms, as the legal definition of social housing is yet to be passed) to keep and build. They also select the buyers of flats owned by municipalities, set the rules of access to the lease of said flats, and, to a certain degree, define the approach towards bad payers and assess individual applications for flat allocation. In an undesirable case, the local housing policy tends to apply the principle of racial discrimination. When an individual application is assessed on the grounds of the 'race' of an applicant or other subjective criteria, one is identified as a 'Gypsy', 'bad payer', 'asocial person' and is treated accordingly. This means that the application is rejected or executed by granting a flat in a locality generally recognized as 'Romani' or 'the worst'. When there is insufficient capacity of social housing, local housing policy may even lead to development of socially excluded sites with privately owned and overpriced substandard tenement apartments. Such ghettos are out of any kind of public control. Formally, municipalities are also founders of all social facilities such as asylums and so on. Municipalities are comparatively less able to influence the functioning of the social system set up mostly by the state. Nevertheless, to a certain degree they can impact the supply of social services available to their citizens. Local authorities also preside over the process of communal planning, which means they can choose to follow closely the ideal standards for its implementation and to respond attentively to the needs of the socially excluded. Last but not least, they have multiple options of supporting local nongovernmental and nonprofit organizations working in the field of social inclusion.
Considering the wide range of possible individual choices and strategies, the prospect of any broad generalization about municipal policies regarding social exclusion does not seem very realistic. However, what seems clear is that, so far, municipalities and state have not reached much success in fighting social exclusion. This claim is supported by findings of a survey of socially excluded Romani ghettos which was conducted for the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs by Gabal Analysis & Consulting. The findings report on some 330 sites throughout the Czech Republic – substantially more than expected – and indicate their general tendency to increase in number.
