Good Governance Monitoring Report – Issue no. 1

 

 

 

Towards an Improved Budget Process

 

One of the most significant and powerful policy instruments available to the government for improving stability of government finances on the one hand, and improved economic and social outcomes for its citizens on the other, is the national budget. The budget plays a central role in effective planning for, and monitoring of, achievement a country’s long-term development vision and its medium term development objectives.

 

Between 2002 and 2004 the PNA made considerable progress in implementing an improved budget process and various other important public financial management reforms.  However, the current political and economic crisis has brought public financial management reform to a halt and has placed previous achievements in danger of being reversed.  For example, the budget for 2006 had still not been submitted to the PLC for approval and, according to the Minister of Finance (Dr. Omar Abdul Razzaq), "it is impossible to complete the draft budget while Palestinian people are under siege".  The budget circular for 2007 was distributed to ministries in August but it seems that the 2007 budget process is already substantially behind schedule.

 

In the light of these facts, assuming that the current financial boycott of the PNA is lifted, one of the main priorities of the PNA should be to build on prior reforms and further improve the budget process in accordance with the following, widely accepted, principles of good practice: comprehensiveness; contestability; predictability; transparency; accountability; and, legitimacy.

 

Based on these principles and related good practice, the following table summarizes the priority reforms which could and should form the basis of the PNA’s budget and public financial management reform agenda for the future.

 

 

Principles

What is good practice?

Priority reforms

Comprehensiveness & contestability

A government budget should encompass all the operations of government and policy decisions and plans should be made within fixed budget constraints in competition with all other resource demands.  New and existing policies should be assessed and evaluated against each other - development projects should not be seen as add-ons, but should be considered together with on-going and new spending programmes of the government. In practice this means that, to enable good decision-making, all spending activities should be ‘on-budget’ (i.e. included in the formal government budget preparation and review process).

 

A merged operating and development budget (i.e., MTDP and Budget) – achieved through merging MoF and MoP functions.

 

A modernized, participatory budget process which ensures that all available resources are allocated based on national policy priorities.

 

A ‘National Agenda’ setting out Palestine’s long-term development goals for the next 10 to 20 years – developed by government (including the PLC) and civil society.

 

Predictability

Public sector performance is enhanced when there is stability in macroeconomic and fiscal policies, strategic objectives and funding of existing policies.  Predictability works best if fiscal and programmes policies are formulated over a medium term period. In practice this means that there should be a known and timely flow of funds to ministries and agencies so that they can implement their programmes as agreed. 

 

Extend the Budget timescale to cover a medium term (i.e., three-year) horizon.

 

Better processes of macroeconomic forecasting and fiscal policy formulation and decision-making - preparation of an annual medium-term fiscal framework.

 

Better aid management and donor coordination.  Better processes for managing unpredictability in revenues and expenditures.

Transparency, accountability & legitimacy

Accountable governments are required to demonstrate their performance in implementing their policy commitments and the utilisation of resources to do so.  Accountability requires transparency - access to complete, accurate and timely information on planned and actual public expenditure needs to be available to allow relevant stakeholders (e.g., legislature, civil society) to play their part in the policy-making and resource allocation process.  Ad-hoc (in-year) resource allocation decisions that are not in line with priorities (agreed through the budget process) should limited.  In practice, this means that there should be political involvement and buy-in in both the budget preparation and execution processes.

More timely and better quality public budget documentation for the PLC, civil society and the general public.

 

Improved authority and capacity of the PLC to influence and monitor the budget preparation and execution process (through, for example, amended public finance legislative framework and upgrading external audit functions).

 

Improved capacity of civil society to improve ‘budget literacy’ and to monitor the outcomes of public expenditure in key areas (e.g., public health service delivery).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Published by Good Governance Initiative - 2006

 

[Back to Index Page]