Fiscal Programming of Structural Reforms

CEF Blended Learning Initiative #lineministries #blendedlearning @CEF_Ljubljana

Embed

  1. This learning initiative is part of the ’’Strengthening Financial Management Functions of Line Ministries’’ project funded through the Strengthening Accountability and the Fiduciary Environment Trust Fund (SAFE). Project’s overall objective is to assist line ministries strengthen capacities for efficient delivery of their financial management functions.
  2. This learning initiative will include the E-Learning phase (May 15-June 5) and face-to-face workshop (June 13-15) in Ljubljana. We will gather 28 finance officials from line ministries and ministries of finance of 13 SEE countries at this knowledge sharing experience!
  3. E-Learning Phase

  4. On May 15th we welcome participants at our Online Learning Campus. During next three weeks we will be working together with regional and IMF experts to examine budgeting and planning processes and practices that serve as a basis for adequate EU reporting. cef-see.org/olc
  5. This learning journey has officially started with the Kick-Off Webinar together with Professor Mojmir: ‘’With this event we want to more systematically address fiscal programming within line ministries, and enhance their cooperation with ministries of finance in national and EU related budgetary decision-making’’
  6. In UNIT 1 we have introduced the Public Financial Management (PFM), explained key objectives that characterize modern PFM systems, and described how PFM processes are structured around budgeting and planning cycle to ensure that public expenditure is well planned, executed and accounted for.
  7. Suzanne Flynn, IMF Regional Adviser, explained in her lecture why MTBFs are at the core of PFM reforms in SEE region
  8. While jointly working on their weekly assignments, participants have identified the key drivers of PFM reforms in SEE region:

    > Weak links between policies, available resources, and budget allocations (failure to achieve strategic objectives)
    > Annual focus leads to sub optimal choices (unaware of medium-term implications)
    > Non-comprehensive budgets (scope of institutions, large reserve funds)
    > Taking piecemeal decisions without reference to their overall effects
    > Public spending doesn’t produce intended effects (goods and services not delivered as planned, budget executed differs from approved).
  9. ..... and proposed initial reforms for their incentivization ...

  10. ... which we have than discussed with Suzanne during the webinar.
  11. With joint conclusions we proceeded to the UNIT 2 of E-Learning phase.
  12. Unit 2 went at the heart of good PFM- budget planning and preparation. It elaborated the key elements of budget preparation process, main players involved, core steps taken from preliminary forecasts to official presentation to the legislature, and typical weaknesses they entail.
  13. Over the webinar we have discussed the steps of ERPs preparation, and evaluated how they can be better integrated with national budget preparation, together with Gabriela Negut and Tijana Stankovic.
  14. But establishing of technical procedures that need to be followed in order to prepare an effective ERP is not sufficient for delivering fiscal reforms. That is why we have explored within the learning unit 3 some of the factors that largely affect the capabilities of a government to successfully design and implement economic reforms.
3
Share

Share

Facebook
Google+