REPUBLIC OF SENEGAL
NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
ELEVENTH LEGISLATURE
PUBLIC EXPENDITURE IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA: A
CULTURE OF ACCOUNTABILITY AND INTEGRITY
Johannesburg, South Africa
April 7-9, 2010
Mr. Aly LO
Chairman, General Economy, Finance, Planning, and Economic
Cooperation Commission
A Culture of Accountability and Integrity in Public Expenditure: The
Role of the National Assembly in Senegal
Good governance, one of the fundamental areas of development policy, is
very important from the standpoint of national representation.
Good governance, broadly understood as the effort to identify a set of
measures to be implemented to achieve human and sustainable
development, rightly touches on the issue of ethics and accountability in
the public expenditure sphere.
Indeed, development imperatives require national representatives to have
a sound grasp of good governance indicators, which revolve around the
necessary harmonization of the political, economic, and social realms.
This global vision of good governance entails promoting ethical
management based on the principles of transparency, equity, effectiveness,
efficiency, the rule of law, and anti-corruption work.
With a view to clearly defining the role of Parliament in a bid to establish
a culture of accountability and integrity in the area of public expenditure,
we shall focus on parliamentary mechanisms that can pave the way for
such a culture with respect to public expenditure, and make broad
recommendations to establish a foundation for an effective culture of
accountability and integrity in public expenditure activities.
I-
Parliamentary Mechanisms for Guaranteeing a Culture of
Accountability and Integrity in Public Expenditure
Accountability is clearly a cornerstone of democracy. Consequently,
with the aim of fostering a culture of integrity and accountability in the
public expenditure sphere, our Parliament has a number of constitutional
prerogatives at its disposal which are indispensable for its mission of
overseeing government action.
2
In this regard, it should be borne in mind that, in addition to the option of
government accountability, other legally protected options are available
for supporting Parliament’s oversight role, among them the general
policy statement issued by the Head of State to the plenary session of the
National Assembly, information sessions (at which questions, some of
which are related to topical issues, are posed orally and in writing),
oversight by parliamentary committees, fact-finding or review missions,
and oversight of entities receiving State funding.
From a budgetary standpoint, despite the fact that the work of
parliamentary representatives is somewhat circumscribed relative to the
sweeping powers vested in the Executive branch, it is important to note
that these parliamentary representatives wield significant power through
their discussions related to fiscal stance, review of the budget law, public
policy assessment and oversight, review of external audit reports, and
passage of the budget law.
The budget approval process, which provides a good opportunity for
representatives to seek in-depth information from government officials, is
a dynamic exercise that demonstrates, in a real life setting, the effective
separation of the legislative and executive powers, in the interest of
protecting the ideals enshrined in the notion of a republic as well as the
wellbeing of citizens.
Review and passage of the budget law go a long way toward ensuring a
culture of integrity and accountability in the public expenditure realm.
It is against this backdrop that our Parliament recently passed the budget
laws for fiscal years 1999–2002, with a view to shedding greater light on
budget operations and monitoring, on a more sustained basis, the tracking
of these operations.
The work agenda, prepared in conjunction with the Ministry of Economy
and Finance and the Audit Office during the Saly workshop held in
December 2009, will make it possible to quickly reduce the delay in the
3
schedule for the settlement of public debt. Without a doubt, the main
objective of this exercise is to be able to fulfill, on a sustained basis, the
requirements stipulated in domestic and community-related provisions
with respect to the budget process.
In addition, Senegal’s National Assembly recently started a new initiative
involving the organization of public policy evaluation missions.
In fact, during the recess period, nine parliamentary public policy
evaluation and supervision missions were held throughout Senegal, with
the aim of assessing the impact of the budget on socioeconomic plans and
improved living conditions of the people.
These missions facilitated fruitful dialogue between constituents and
their elected officials, thus giving the latter an opportunity to prepare a list
of development issues raised by the local populations and to hold
constructive discussions with the central authorities, officials in
government technical units, and social actors on economic and political
governance programs and projects.
As a result of these missions, parliamentary representatives were able to
engage in actual on-site activities in the following areas: forest
management, coastal threats, the effectiveness of public expenditure on
health, agricultural policy, energy-related public policy commitments and
constraints, integrated regional development, the status of infrastructure
work covered in the Triennial Public Investment Plan (TPIP), and
flood-related issues.
II-
The National Assembly – Adoption of a Culture of
Accountability and Integrity in the Area of Public Expenditure
Parliament plays a dual role with respect to public expenditure – as the
budget authority (authorizing budget expenditure by the State) or as the
spending authority (determining its own budget).
As the spending authority, Parliament is allowed great latitude, given that
4
it in effect manages the entire process for determining its appropriations.
It is, however, required to uphold standards of accountability and
integrity with respect to public expenditure.
Consequently, Parliament, a high-ranking oversight authority, voluntarily
abides by good governance rules. For this reason, Article 30 of the rules
of procedure stipulates that, at the start of each legislative term and of the
first regular session of the year, the National Assembly shall appoint,
from its own members, an Accounting and Oversight Commission
composed of twenty members.
Article 31 stipulates that the Accounting and Oversight Committee shall
be responsible for the supervision, accounting activities, and
management of National Assembly budget appropriations. To this end,
a written report pertaining, inter alia, to the status of appropriations and
expenditures must be submitted to this Committee by the parliamentary
administrators at the end of each quarter. The Committee is vested with
the authority to review the relevant accounting documents.
The Accounting and Oversight Committee submits a quarterly report and
the annual balance sheet to the office of the National Assembly. The
latter is required to inform the Conference of Presidents of the content of
this report.
The Accounting and Oversight Committee, after reconciling the
Treasurer’s accounts with the accounts of the parliamentary
administrator’s office, provides the Assembly with a written report on
execution of the oversight function entrusted to it at the start of each
budget session. The final account for each verified component is
submitted by the President of the National Assembly to the President of
the Audit Office.
5
III- Recommendations for Enhancing a Culture of Accountability
and Integrity in Public Expenditure by Parliament
In terms of areas for improving the organization and execution of
parliamentary work, it should be noted that emphasis needs to be placed
on the capacity of Parliament to address queries to the public authorities
in an effective manner.
The first area of intervention will therefore entail assistance with building
the capacity of parliamentary representatives, with a view to enabling
optimal discharge of their duties. To this end, an effort will be made to
furnish the tools for reading and overseeing the budget and to provide
these parliamentary representatives with training so that they can use
these tools effectively.
In addition, special attention should be paid to the issue of the
effectiveness and efficiency of Parliament from an administrative
standpoint, in order to lend greater transparency to the activities of elected
officials. An effort will be made to equip finance committees with the
necessary expertise.
The second area of intervention could be focused on fostering initiatives
to expand the information-related authority of Parliament by establishing
a parliamentary center for public policy evaluation having a dual mission:
First, conducting a retrospective evaluation by entrusting to this
center the function of providing Parliament with information on the
balance established between the legal, administrative, or financial
resources allocated to any kind of public policy work; and
Second, conducting a prospective evaluation by having this center
provide Parliament with studies related to the legal, administrative,
or financial resources that will be necessary to achieve the public
policy goals that are funded with public resources.
6
As an information and decision-making support entity that facilitates
prospective evaluation, this center could work on the design and
implementation of instruments for gauging the impact of policies already
instituted and on assessing the effectiveness of legislation.
Lastly, the effectiveness of mechanisms aimed at ensuring the soundness
of the special relationship with the Audit Office is essential in order to
keep Parliament apprised of execution of the State budget or the budgets
of other public entities, from the standpoint of the legality and legitimacy
of expenditures.
7