Washington, DC, Feb 04, 2009 (This Day/All Africa Global Media) -- Nigeria is among 25 countries in the world that provide scant or no budget information to enable the public hold the government accountable for managing their money, according to a new comprehensive study conducted by the influential International Budget Partnership (IBP).
The research carried out in 85 countries finds that nearly 50 per cent of national governments are successful in hiding "unpopular, wasteful and corrupt" spending from the public.
The survey which was launched in Washington, D.C. Monday lists Nigeria, Cambodia, Nicaragua, China, Burkina Faso, Fiji, Honduras, Dominican Republic, Vietnam, Yemen, Afghanistan, Chad, Bolivia, Cameroon, Angola, Senegal and Kyrgyz in the "poor performing" group.
Equatorial Guinea, Sao Tome and Principe, Sudan, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Algeria and Liberia are the worst performing countries, scoring between 2 and 0 out of 100 points.
South Africa, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, France and the United States were listed as the top performers, meaning that they make extensive information publicly available, as generally required by good public financial management practices.
Top performing countries, according to the report, score above 80 out of a possible 100 points in the Open Budget Index 2008 (OBI). The average score for the OBI 2008 is 39, indicating that governments on average provide minimal information on their budge and financial activities.
Nigeria scored 19. Slovenia, Botswana and Sri Lanka have a strong showing in the developing world, says the report. It argues that this demonstrates the developing world can be transparent if the government is willing.
Director of the IBP, Warren Krafchik, spoke of the importance of a transparent system that allows the public to access how much is allocated to different types of spending, what revenues are collected and how resources are used.
"Open budgets are empowering. They allow people to be the judge of whether or not their government officials are good stewards of public funds," Krafchik said.
"Our goal is to promote increased public access to government budget information. We've seen how this can lead to concrete improvements in people's lives," he added.
The survey findings, based on data collected before September 28, 2007, also examined the ability of auditors and the legislature to hold their government accountable. It notes that lack of information prevents these players from carrying out their responsibilities effectively.
Another issue raised in the report is the little time devoted to public hearing and scrutiny of budgets. The survey finds that in 24 out of 85 countries, the legislature received the budget six weeks or less before the budget year begins. Audit institutions, it was discovered, lack sufficient independence or funding to do their jobs.
IBP argued that members of the public will be in a position to influence decisions about what to spend public money on and the quality of how the money is spent if they have access to information. It was further discovered that less transparent countries are those that depend heavily on revenues of oil and gas resources and foreign aid in addition to having weak democratic institutions or autocratic regimes.
IBP called on governments to improve budget transparency and accountability by making extensive information available to the public.
The first Open Budget Survey which studied 59 countries was carried out in 2006. The 2007 study saw a slight improvement in some countries attributable to government policies, the report says.
IBP was formed within the Centre on Budget and Policy Priorities to collaborate with civil society groups to analyse, monitor and influence budget processes, institutions and outcomes.
The Centre on Budget and Policy Priorities is a non-profit, non-partisan research organisation and policy institute that conducts research on a range of government policies and programmes.
For full details for IBP click here.
The research carried out in 85 countries finds that nearly 50 per cent of national governments are successful in hiding "unpopular, wasteful and corrupt" spending from the public.
The survey which was launched in Washington, D.C. Monday lists Nigeria, Cambodia, Nicaragua, China, Burkina Faso, Fiji, Honduras, Dominican Republic, Vietnam, Yemen, Afghanistan, Chad, Bolivia, Cameroon, Angola, Senegal and Kyrgyz in the "poor performing" group.
Equatorial Guinea, Sao Tome and Principe, Sudan, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Algeria and Liberia are the worst performing countries, scoring between 2 and 0 out of 100 points.
South Africa, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, France and the United States were listed as the top performers, meaning that they make extensive information publicly available, as generally required by good public financial management practices.
Top performing countries, according to the report, score above 80 out of a possible 100 points in the Open Budget Index 2008 (OBI). The average score for the OBI 2008 is 39, indicating that governments on average provide minimal information on their budge and financial activities.
Nigeria scored 19. Slovenia, Botswana and Sri Lanka have a strong showing in the developing world, says the report. It argues that this demonstrates the developing world can be transparent if the government is willing.
Director of the IBP, Warren Krafchik, spoke of the importance of a transparent system that allows the public to access how much is allocated to different types of spending, what revenues are collected and how resources are used.
"Open budgets are empowering. They allow people to be the judge of whether or not their government officials are good stewards of public funds," Krafchik said.
"Our goal is to promote increased public access to government budget information. We've seen how this can lead to concrete improvements in people's lives," he added.
The survey findings, based on data collected before September 28, 2007, also examined the ability of auditors and the legislature to hold their government accountable. It notes that lack of information prevents these players from carrying out their responsibilities effectively.
Another issue raised in the report is the little time devoted to public hearing and scrutiny of budgets. The survey finds that in 24 out of 85 countries, the legislature received the budget six weeks or less before the budget year begins. Audit institutions, it was discovered, lack sufficient independence or funding to do their jobs.
IBP argued that members of the public will be in a position to influence decisions about what to spend public money on and the quality of how the money is spent if they have access to information. It was further discovered that less transparent countries are those that depend heavily on revenues of oil and gas resources and foreign aid in addition to having weak democratic institutions or autocratic regimes.
IBP called on governments to improve budget transparency and accountability by making extensive information available to the public.
The first Open Budget Survey which studied 59 countries was carried out in 2006. The 2007 study saw a slight improvement in some countries attributable to government policies, the report says.
IBP was formed within the Centre on Budget and Policy Priorities to collaborate with civil society groups to analyse, monitor and influence budget processes, institutions and outcomes.
The Centre on Budget and Policy Priorities is a non-profit, non-partisan research organisation and policy institute that conducts research on a range of government policies and programmes.
For full details for IBP click here.
3 comments:
Great, that is exactly where we want to be.
How can Cambodia be a poor country while being under the head-down-first leadership of Hun Sen the greatest???????
promote transparency who are you kidding?in cambodia I die laughing about transparency, effieciency or neutrality!
like a khmer saying: like father like son and I say like your leaders like their people!
there is no mistake to assert that the current leaders if compared as an individual should not hold any positions in the government administration. by work standard or world standard the current leaders cannot even read their application nor can they fill out!
the current leaders just listen to their advisors, perhaps able to read the news and react when any implementations are suspicious of loosening their grip of power.
what's new with these leaders?
Post a Comment