GRP+B for Increasing Accountability and Effective Development ________________________________

1. GRP+B for Increasing Accountability and Effective Development ________________________________ Gender and Public Finance Management High Level Global Meeting, Kigali Rwanda on 26-28 July 2011 Elias Baingana Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning Rwanda

2. Presentation outline • What is PFM? • How does a sound PFM link to AE and DE? • What opportunities does PFM present for GRPB? • How have these opportunities been tapped in Rwanda? • What are the key constraints? • What strategies are recommended? • Conclusion

3. What is PFM? • PFM is about driving the performance ofpublic services through the effective and efficient use of public money. • PFM system covers the following processes: • Legislation and Regulation • Standards and Codes • Strategy and Planning • Budget formulation and control • Procurement and Treasury Management • Financial reporting and accounting • Audit and oversight

4. Why do we need a sound PFM system? • Effective PFM is important for the following reasons: • Effective PFM contributes to improved service delivery. • Effective PFM generates important information for better decision making and better value for money. • Effective PFM promotes transparency and accountability. • It helps to give development partners the necessary confidence against their own fiduciary risk. • Building trust and confidence for stakeholders especially private sector.

5. How does a sound PFM system link to AE and DE? • We know with certainty that Development Effectiveness requires a Sound PFM system. • We also know and we have just seen that Aid Effectiveness requires a sound PFM system. • There is undeniable evidence that GRPB increases economic growth and leads to DE. • There is reason to believe that GRP and B is at the center of PFM and leads to both AE and DE.

6. What opportunities does PFM present? • At the level of legislative reform, PFM process provides an opportunity to implement a program based budget. • PFM process further allows to specify at what level of detail budget should be prepared, approved and executed. • At the level of Standards and Codes, PFM process permits to create and capture detailed inputs or budget lines, activities and outputs. • At the level of strategy and planning, PFM provides frameworks for making international, national and sectoral commitments to reducing gender inequalities.

7. What opportunities does PFM present? • PFM further provides a framework for assessing revenue and expenditure policies to influence the unpaid care work and bring equality in paid work. • PFM also provides space or policy dialogues structures for effective discussion on gender inequality and agree on gender equality priorities. • It also provides performance assessment frameworks to measure progress against gender equality commitments.

8. How have these opportunities been tapped? • At the budget formulation and control level, PFM provides instruments to mainstream gender in the budget. • It also provides space for policy dialogue on gender equality priorities and resource allocations. • At the audit and oversight level, PFM provides incentives for delivering against gender equality commitments. • It also provides an opportunity to undertake audits and measure the impact of gender equality interventions.

9. How have these opportunities been tapped? • Rwanda is implementing program based budgeting since 2003. • The revised CoA is very detailed and SmartIFMS very flexible to capture required information. • Gender equality commitments are reflected in Vision 2020, EDPRS, SSPs and DDPs. • Discussions on gender equality gaps and priorities are done in the officially recognized forums of SWGs, JSRs, JADFs and Imihigo.

10. How have these opportunities been tapped? • We have performance assessment frameworks through progress against gender equality targets are measured (EDPRS Results and Policy Matrix, GBS, Imihigo and PADs). • We have instruments for mainstreaming gender in the budget preparation process (BCC, GBS, and GDEs). • We have established structures for dialoging on gender priorities and resource allocation (JBSRs, Ministerial Budget Consultations, Position Papers, Cabinet and Parliament). • The Parliament and Civil Society Organizations make independent evaluations of gender equality commitments.

11. What are the key constraints? • Capacity challenges both for PFM and GRB • Gender specific interventions are not adequately dealt with at al levels of PFM. • Inadequate analysis and understanding of gender issues • Gender focus is on expenditure side and limited effort on resource side. • Limited involvement of CSOs in gender budget advocacy. • Lack of relevant and reliable sex disaggregated data • NISR that is still young and weak data bank • Mindset • Wrong perception about GRB that has been attracting some resistance and limited implementation of commitments. • Off-budget expenditures but now becoming less important

12. What are the recommended strategies? • Capacity development has be to part of the broad PFM strategy and capacity building in GRP and B be viewed as an integral part of this strategy. • Maintain a robust gender communication strategy and put a relentless effort in gender equality sensitization and awareness. • Make gender equality priorities attractive to both human rights activists and public finance managers. • Establish data banks and strengthen data collection institutions.

13. Conclusion • Sound Public Finance Management, Aid Effectiveness and Development Effectiveness goals are better achieved when GRPB is included in the equation. • We have made good progress in identifying entry points for GRBP in the PFM reforms and in mainstreaming gender in the PFM cycle but some challenges limit the pace at which we would like to move. • We are aware that mainstreaming GRPB is a process and we have not been discouraged by challenges. We have developed strategies to help us keep committed to our objectives.

14. Thank you