Govt not very open with budget process: survey

GOVERNMENT provides the public with only some information on the National Budget and financial activities during the course of the budget year, according to an international survey.

Namibia’s score on the Open Budget Index of the Washington DC-based International Budget Partnership (IBP) and Namibia’s Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) was released last week.
Out of the 85 countries surveyed, Namibia was ranked 35th and scored 47 per cent.
The survey revealed that Government does not make the draft budget available before it is tabled in Parliament. Opposition Members of Parliament, ruling party backbenchers and the general public thus have no influence on the budget preparation.
‘This makes it somewhat difficult for citizens to hold government accountable for its management of the public’s money,’ the survey revealed.
The Open Budget Index (OBI) evaluates the quantity and type of information available to the public in a country’s budget documents.
One of the most important documents is the government budget proposal (draft).
‘It should contain the Executive’s plans for the upcoming year along with the cost of the proposed activities. The proposal should be available to the public and to the legislature before being finalised, at least three months before the start of the budget year to allow for sufficient review and public debate,’ the survey recommended.
In Namibia, the proposal provides significant information to the public, meaning citizens have a comprehensive picture of Government’s plans for taxing and spending for the upcoming year, but only after it has been tabled in Parliament.
‘It is difficult to track spending, revenue collection and borrowing during the year. Namibia publishes a quarterly in-year report, but it is incomplete and is not published on a regular basis. Namibia does not publish its mid-year review. Publishing these documents would greatly strengthen public accountability, since they provide updates on how the budget is being implemented during the year,’ the experts noted.
It is also difficult to assess budget performance in Namibia once the budget year is over. A year-end report is produced, but it lacks several important details, preventing full comparisons between what was budgeted and what was actually spent and collected.
Also, while Namibia makes its audit report public, it does not provide any information on whether the audit report’s recommendations are successfully implemented, the OBI report criticised.
Access to the highly detailed budget information needed to understand Government’s progress in undertaking a specific project or activity remains extremely limited.
Namibia has not codified the right to access Government information into law. Beyond improving access to key budget documents, there are other ways in which Namibia’s budget process could be made more open.
‘Opportunities for citizen participation in budget debates could be introduced.’
‘The independence of Namibia’s supreme audit institution (the Auditor General) is limited. That Office has some discretion to decide which audits to undertake, but it does not have a budget sufficient to fulfil its mandate,’ the report concluded
The OBI 2008 survey showed that 68 of the 85 countries surveyed do not provide the public with the comprehensive, timely and useful information people need to understand, participate in and monitor the use of public funds.
Almost half of the 85 countries studied provide minimal or no information.
Thirty-two percent provide some information; and only 5 countries provide extensive information. They are Britain, South Africa, France, New Zealand and the USA.
Slovenia, Sri Lanka, and Botswana provide ‘significant information’ to their people, which demonstrates that developing countries can achieve transparency given sufficient willingness of their governments to be open and accountable to their people, the study concluded.
brigitte@namibian.com.na