1 / 24

PUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT ISSUES IN GOVERNANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION

PUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT ISSUES IN GOVERNANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION. David Shand PFM Consultant dshand@worldbank.org. February 14-16, 2006 Washington, DC. INTRODUCTION . SOUND PFM PRACTICES ARE A SIGNIFICANT ANTI-CORRUPTION TOOL - POOR PFM PRACTICES MAY FACILITATE CORRUPTION

xalvadora
Download Presentation

PUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT ISSUES IN GOVERNANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. PUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT ISSUESIN GOVERNANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION David Shand PFM Consultant dshand@worldbank.org February 14-16, 2006 Washington, DC

  2. INTRODUCTION • SOUND PFM PRACTICES ARE A SIGNIFICANT ANTI-CORRUPTION TOOL - POOR PFM PRACTICES MAY FACILITATE CORRUPTION • MAJOR COMPONENTS OF SOUND PFM • Comprehensive and realistic budget • Clear allocations of responsibilities and accountabilities across all levels of management • Well designed and functioning systems of internal control • Reliable, relevant and timely flows of financial information to all levels of management • Sound revenue administration • Sound procurement practices • Independent, timely and competent external auditing and follow up

  3. SOUND PFM COUNTERACTS CORRUPTION BY • Imposing discipline by setting out requirements of actors • Strengthening the probability of detection through information flows (audit trails) and review mechanisms • Creating a disadvantage for the corrupt – exceptions are needed for corruption to occur and this increases fear of detection • Protecting vulnerable areas – through identifying areas of higher risk (e.g. procurement, major capital projects are typically seen as higher risk areas) for particular attention • Facilitating auditing – by providing a system and information to audit • Permitting proper management and oversight through providing the necessary management information

  4. BUT THERE NEEDS TO BE SIGNALS AND INCENTIVES • Observance of the rules and requirements • Consistent enforcement of the rules • Consequences of non-compliance

  5. “FIDUCIARY” ISSUES • Fiduciary risk – important to demystify the concept • Best assurance that donor funds are well managed is the existence of a sound PFM system • Therefore developmental (helping improve PFM) and fiduciary concerns are complementary or inseparable • and using the same PFM diagnostic information • Donors need ex ante assessment and documentation of quality of PFM and procurement systems to inform decisions on financial support • Note that there are separate governance and anti-corruption diagnostic tools

  6. “FIDUCIARY” ISSUES (cont’d) • Going in to financial assistance with “eyes open” – no assistance is risk free (just as there is never zero corruption) • Need to compare costs and benefits of the assistance, and determine our “risk appetite” or threshold • Fiduciary risk has been seen as a donor issue – but the country is equally concerned with the management of its funds • Just as good governance and anti-corruption activities are primarily the responsibility of the country , countries are committed to take the lead on PFM and procurement reform (Paris HLF etc)

  7. RISK OF WHAT? • That donor funds may not reach the budget – diverted for unknown or unknown purposes (oil revenues ?) • That donor funds reach the budget but it is not known how they are spent because of lack of reliable and timely information on budget execution • That funds reach the budget but are not spent according to the budget – the budget is not executed • And/or are misspent on corrupt, wasteful or otherwise inappropriate purposes • Budget system may not focus adequately on poverty (PREM territory, not FM) • Note that issues other than PFM issues also influence these risks • Therefore the term “financial management risk” is increasingly used to indicate that PFM is only part of fiduciary risk

  8. PAUSE FOR THOUGHT • Bank requirement that our funds are spent on the purposes for which they are intended? • What is meant by “intended purposes”? • If we mean the government’s budget, what if it is poorly constructed – inadequately prioritized and/or unrealistic? • How can we track funds in a budget support environment?

  9. OTHER RISK CONCEPTS • Sovereign financial risk – risk of non payment • Development risk – assistance will not achieve the objective of poverty reduction • Reputational risk – perceptions may be real or otherwise of waste or corruption

  10. POSSIBLE RISK MITIGATION MEASURES • Flow of funds issues – the funds reaching the budget • Review of the control environment of the central bank, through which Bank funds flow (IMF does this) • Audit of the deposit account • Quality of PFM issues • PFM improvement plans, technical assistance – the developmental objective (issues of realism, sequencing and country ownership are important)

  11. POSSIBLE RISK MITIGATION MEASURES (Cont’d) • Requirement for timely, reliable and audited financial statements covering budget execution (frequently a major failing) – but rejected by the World Bank board in 2000 as a requirement for adjustment lending • Issues Concerning “appropriateness” of expenditures • Deeming or earmarking assistance to particular budget items (positive list) – virtual poverty funds • Requiring the funds to be deposited into a dedicated account, to be used only for designated purposes (again, a positive list) - real poverty funds

  12. Possible Risk Mitigation (Cont’d) • Adopting a negative list - (defense, luxury items, nuclear reactors, jewelry, alcohol ) c.f. OP 8.60 Development Policy Lending • Given fungibility of budget resources, positive and negative lists are really “fig-leafs” , but may be important to lessen reputational risks • Both positive and negative lists may involve audit verification • Public expenditure tracking surveys (PETS) – did the funds reach the point of service delivery (assuming this was specified) • On all risk mitigation measures it is desirable for donors to coordinate and avoid short-term fragmented measures

  13. USING THE PFM INFORMATION IN DECISION MAKING ON BUDGET SUPPORT • No minimum PFM standard established by the Bank for DPL • DPL may be supported in a weak PFM environment where there is country commitment to PFM reform, and PFM is improving • Therefore PFM improvements may be a result of rather than a precondition for DPL • PFM conditionality in adjustment lending – same issues as other conditionality, moving to prior actions rather than ex post conditions, fewer and more results oriented etc , using programmatic DPLs recognizing the long-term nature of needed reforms

  14. KEY PFM ISSUES IN ANTI-CORRUPTION • PEFA PFM Performance Measurement Framework and CFAA Guidelines provide useful PFM framework • Comprehensive Budget • Limited off-budget accounts • What is “off-budget” ? • Transparency concerning off-budget activities • Realistic Budget • Unrealistic budgets cannot be implemented • Therefore in budget execution the formal budget may be replaced by a non-transparent system, of cash rationing – deciding who gets paid

  15. KEY PFM ISSUES (Cont’d) Clear Allocation of Responsibilities • Budgets should be allocated to service delivery units • As opposed to being centrally controlled by an all-powerful finance director • In the latter case “intended purposes” is less clear • Authority should be clearly designated – whose approval is required for what? • But should not be overly complex – too many layers of approval may facilitate corruption

  16. KEY PFM ISSUES (Cont’d) • Internal Control Systems • Is the system adequate? (control risk) • Does it operate as intended ? (inherent risk) • Should include appropriate segregation of duties • Should be clearly documented, with appropriate training for all actors • Should include internal audit • Mechanisms should not be overly complex - complexity may facilitate corruption • Staffing/payroll controls may be an important aspect (ghost workers, nepotism, etc

  17. KEY PFM ISSUES (Cont’d) • Information Systems • Timely, reliable and relevant financial reporting is needed for management as well as for accountability • Computerized IFMIS assists in information integrity – but no need to over-design • Sound Revenue Administration • limited official discretion • clear and non-complex laws • transparency of tax-payer obligations • provision for review/ appeal

  18. KEY PFM ISSUES (Cont’d) • Sound Procurement Procedures • Competitive bidding and transparent procedures • Avoiding excessive complexity • Provision for review/appeal • External Auditing and Follow Up • An external audit institution which has independence and capacity

  19. KEY PFM ISSUES (Cont’d) • Focusing on systems as well as substantive cases “road conditions, not just traffic accidents” • And impact, through follow up of recommendations by Executive and legislature • But audit is not a magic bullet – cannot provide absolute assurance, and is not specifically tasked with uncovering corruption • And audit institutions may be corrupt, too

  20. GENERAL ISSUE • What if requirements are simply not observed e.g. required approvals, submission of required reports etc • PFM therefore involves institutional issues (incentives etc), not just “technical” fixes • Do we adequately understand these institutional issues?

  21. CONSIDER NOW THE PARALLELS WITH FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT IN INVESTMENT LENDING • Requirement for reasonable (acceptable) assurance that funds are spent on intended purposes - tracking the use of funds is possible • Prime responsibility for maintaining an adequate control framework rests with the country • Upstream diagnosis of the project financial management system, (FM Assessment Report) identifying risk areas and overall level of risk country, organizational and project specific • Importance of realistic budget, financial reporting for management and external monitoring (FMRs) and competent and timely auditing

  22. PARALLELS WITH INVESTMENT LENDING (Cont’d) • Simplification of procedures – complexity may promote corruption • Use of country systems (i.e. the PFM system) is the preferred option where the system is acceptable • Desirable harmonization with other donors (sharing the risk ?) • Under SWAps, acceptance of pooling and no need to trace Bank funds to individual items • Note role of Department of Institutional Integrity (INT) – forensic auditing

  23. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT INITIATIVES • Many performance management reform initiatives – results based management/budgeting, performance budgeting, etc. • This is PREM rather than FM territory (PERs, not CFAAs) • Corruption/poor governance will reduce reported performance levels • Reductions in performance over time or poor performance compared with other relevant areas (benchmarking) may indicate corruption • But be aware of the limitations of performance measures and of benchmarking

  24. Discussion

More Related