38925 The Role of Legislatures in Papers Poverty Reduction Experience and Future Directions orking W Katrina Sharkey WBI Theodore Dreger Sabina Bhatia THE ROLE OF LEGISLATURES IN POVERTY REDUCTION Experience and Future Directions Katrina Sharkey, Theodore Dreger, and Sabina Bhatia World Bank Institute Washington, D.C. Copyright © 2006 The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank 1818 H Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20433, U.S.A. The World Bank enjoys copyright under protocol 2 of the Universal Copyright Convention. This material may nonetheless be copied for research, educational, or scholarly purposes only in the member countries of The World Bank. Material in this series is subject to revision. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this document are entirely those of the author(s) and should not be attributed in any manner to the World Bank, to its affiliated organizations, or the members of its Board of Executive Directors or the countries they represent. The Role of Legislatures in Poverty Reduction: Experience and Future Directions Katrina Sharkey, Theodore Dreger, and Sabina Bhatia 2006. 21 pages. Stock No. 37259 Contents Foreword v 1. Introduction 1 2. Why Involve Legislatures? 3 3. PRS Formulation and Implementation ­ Involvement of Parliamentarians 6 4. Constraints to Legislative Input in the PRSP Process 9 5. Conclusions and Next Steps 13 Bibliography 15 iii Foreword As part of its governance program, the Poverty Reduction and Economic Reform Division of the World Bank Institute (WBIPR) has sought to strengthen parliamentary understanding, participation and oversight of poverty reduction strategies. This paper forms part of the effort of the World Bank to deepen the understanding of the role of parliaments in the Poverty Reduction Strategy process with a view to building country ownership and more effective policies for the implementation of poverty reduction strategies. Indeed, it is now five years since the launch of the Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) initiative. It has become an important channel for the World Bank to provide development assistance and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to provide concessional finance to low income countries. Based on broad-based participation, the PRS process is expected to be country-driven and promote national ownership of policies. Part of the effort to broaden and deepen such participation is evi- dent from the gradual institutionalization of the role of elected representatives in the PRS process. Whilst the participation of legislators is considered to be beneficial, if not essential, evidence on the ground has been mixed. Some countries have taken greater advantage of the benefits of participa- tion than others. This paper traces the involvement of legislators in the PRS process and identifies key bottlenecks which make deeper engagement difficult. The paper concludes with suggestions for strengthening parliamentary oversight and civil society's interface with parliament on poverty reduction issues. The authors would like to recognize the substantive and editorial contributions of C. V. Madhukar, consultant to the World Bank, in addition to the research assistance provided by Anna Bordon, in- tern in the IMF's External Relations Department, summer 2002. The peer review conducted by Frederick Stapenhurst, Hon. Steve Akorli, and Robert Russell, Advisor at the IMF's External Rela- tions Department, is gratefully acknowledged. Katrina Sharkey is Senior Operations Officer with the World Bank's Poverty Reduction and Eco- nomic Management Network. Theodore Dreger is Senior Governance Specialist with the Africa Branch of the Canadian International Development Agency. Sabina Bhatia is Deputy Chief of Pub- lic Affairs with the External Relations Department of the IMF. The views expressed in the paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund or the Canadian International Development Agency. Roumeen Islam Manager Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Division World Bank Institute v 1. Introduction In the last two decades, a number of countries have adopted more democratic forms of government. As democracy has spread, the electorate has become more important in economic policymaking. These changes, coupled with new technologies making communication cheaper and more widely available, have spawned an array of grassroots movements, civil society organizations (CSOs), and parliamen- tary networks. The International Financial Institutions (IFI) have continued to adapt their policies and operations to take into account the changing global environment. They have had increasingly active dialogues with civil society organizations, including labor groups, faith-based organizations, and legislators. Both institutions have been working with country authorities to encourage broader and deeper stakeholder participation in the formulation and implementation of poverty reduction strategies. A distinguishing feature of the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) is that it is country-driven and promotes na- tional ownership of policies based on broad-based participation. Democratically elected legislators1 have a critical role to play in this process, by articulating the aspirations of their constituents in na- tional policy, and by providing oversight of the implementation of the poverty reduction strategy. While there are several stakeholders whose views are important in the formulation and implementation of the PRSP, this paper focuses on the role of elected representatives in the process. Much has been written on stakeholder participation in the PRSP process, and the limited involvement of legislators has been frequently highlighted. Analysis conducted World Bank and IMF staff in preparation for the 2005 Review of the PRS approach highlights a growing receptivity to and evidence of participation in, policy dialogue by a broader range of stakeholders, actors and institutions, including parliaments, trade unions, business associations, non-governmental organizations, and vulnerable groups. References to the need for parliamentary approval of PRS policies can be found in many PRSP docu- ments, and of course, any required legislation would have to be enacted by parliaments. Despite this, parliamentary review of such strategies to date has been limited. A snapshot of the current status of parliamentary engagement in the PRS process reveals: · About one third of strategies highlight the role which parliament is expected to play in PRS oversight, either through a dedicated PRSP standing committee (e.g. Azerbaijan and Ghana), or through membership of executive-led PRSP Steering Committees (e.g. Chad and Georgia). · Parliament, civil society, and community-based organizations are beginning to build coalitions with one another in order to bolster opportunities for influencing policy decisions. For exam- ple Albania's 2003 budget allocation for the education sector was increased as a result of dis- cussions between civil society actors and parliament, which were followed by successful lob- bying by parliament with the executive branch · There is some evidence that parliaments' involvement in PRS oversight is beginning to rein- force the integrity of the PRS process and create a bridge between policy imperatives and con- stituency needs. In this paper, we explore the question of involvement of legislators in the poverty reduction strategy process in greater detail. Section I looks at the rationale for involving legislators in developing the PRSP. Section II looks at the role that legislators have played thus far in PRS preparation and over- 1For the most part, this paper uses the terms legislators, parliamentarians, and elected representatives inter- changeably. 1 2 Katrina Sharkey, Theodore Dreger, and Sabina Bhatia sight. Section III reviews constraints which legislators face in engaging in PRS issues. The last section draws conclusions and suggests ways in which parliamentary engagement might be deepened and how external partners can help them to sustain their involvement in PRS processes. The Role of Legislatures in Poverty Reduction 3 2. Why Involve Legislatures? Good governance and effective public sector performance are central to PRSP planning, implementa- tion and oversight. Both aim to (i) improve transparency and accountability in the delivery of services to the poor, and (ii) promote the establishment of a conducive climate for investment and growth. In this context, parliamentary oversight of the PRSP can ensure long-term country ownership of the strategies and generate the cross-party support necessary to sustain reforms. As a representative insti- tution, parliament can ensure the integrity of the participatory process and give poor people a stronger voice. While differences exist across parliamentary systems, most parliaments, through their constitutional mandates, are asked to fulfill four key functions designed to improve governance and effectiveness of the poverty reduction strategy process. Through their legislative function, parliaments are responsible for reviewing bills and enacting legisla- tion, amendments and regulations which are needed to support reforms and national development pro- grams. Second, through its representative function, parliament is an institution through which the voices and preferences of the public, and particularly of poor people, can be heard. Parliamentarians' outreach to their constituents on issues of national policy is particularly relevant in this context. Most PRSPs al- lude to the importance of governance improvements and meaningful participatory processes for pov- erty reduction strategies. Ensuring that parliaments' role is institutionalized in this process is key to PRSP design and evaluation. Ethiopia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, for example, have already under- taken the reform of their legislative systems to institutionalize the participation of parliament in PRS oversight and evaluation. Third, parliaments hold the `power of the purse' with respect to the review and passing of annual country budgets. Given the need to link PRS objectives with revenues, expenditures, and increasingly, results, parliamentary understanding of PRS linkages to the national budget process becomes increas- ingly relevant as countries progress from design to implementation of their national strategies (Wehner, 2004). Legislatures in most countries also have the constitutional right to oversee national budgets--reviewing whether the government's allocation of resources is consistent with their constitu- ents' demands as well as with the country's developmental objectives; scrutinizing government expen- ditures and revenues (including loans and credits from the international institutions); ensuring that money is allocated to programs with legislative approval, and identifying instances of financial dis- honesty and irregularity (Stapenhurst and Pelizzo, 2004). Lastly, and perhaps most important for PRS implementation, parliament is a key institution of ac- countability and transparency. Through their oversight function, parliaments, and particularly parlia- mentary committees, can investigate poverty-related issues, and can also engage actively in the moni- toring and evaluation of national development programs. A recent UNDP-National Democratic Insti- tute publication notes that efforts by parliamentary committees to "gather information regarding public policy can also double as a mechanism by which the committee can demonstrate its active engagement in policy issues."(citation?) Against this background, there are several reasons for legislative involvement in the formulation and oversight on the implementation of the PRSP. 4 Katrina Sharkey, Theodore Dreger, and Sabina Bhatia A. Enhancement of Country Ownership: Meaningful country ownership requires: (i) adequate space for broad participatory mechanisms, which in turn provides the scope for parliamentarians to represent their constituencies; and (ii) the possibility for MPs to garner broad cross-partisan support. Ownership also implies the use of national institutions which are grounded in indigenous governance systems rather than those imported from the outside. As a national institution, parliament can play an important role in raising citizens' awareness on key national issues. Furthermore, legislative outreach by individual MPs and parliamentary staff can assist in strengthening the governance process, building trust in the representative process, and support for reform processes. B. Role of Legislators in the Budget Process Legislators have a constitutional mandate to oversee the planning, enactment, implementation, and monitoring of the national budget. According to a 2005 report commissioned by the Federal German Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development, Parliament has consider- How the poverty reduction strategy paper (PRSP) able authority in the context of the process fits into the budget cycle budget cycle in most countries, and is involved directly in the PRSP process as it is reflected (or not reflected) in the Poverty Diagnosis Establisgment of Budget cycle budget. Given that poverty reduction and Analysis poverty policy process with priorities PRSP changes funding from international financial institutions flows through the national budget, there are additional reasons to build legislative capacity, to link the oversight of national budget and PRSP Monitoring and Policy processes. A quotation from a regional evaluation of implementation and seminar organized in 2002 by the Phil- outcomes/impacts service delivery ippines Congress (a non-PRSP country) jointly with the Inter-Parliamentary Un- ion aptly describes how national budget and PRS initiatives come together in parliament: The National Budget is the most important political statement that any government has to make. It de- fines in the most concrete terms, the direction of national policy, the plan of action, and the cost impli- cations of government programs and projects during the fiscal year and identifies the resources required to implement them. The national budget is thus the fundamental indicator of what government is doing and what objectives it is pursuing. C. Openness and Transparency Openness and transparency provide for more meaningful debate and discourse, and give greater oppor- tunity for legislators in particular, and stakeholders more generally, to be involved in the formulation and monitoring of the implementation process and the utilization of funds. Legislative participation in the scrutiny of public accounts is likely to be more effective if legislators are involved in the budget process from the planning stage. As a result, they are better able to monitor the allocation of funds for poverty reduction, and the implementation of a poverty reduction strategy. The Role of Legislatures in Poverty Reduction 5 D. Participation and consensus building As the elected representatives of the people, legislators should play an important role in ensuring that the electorate's priorities are reflected in the country's poverty reduction strategy. Social development specialists have observed that "successful implementation of development policies is increasingly linked to participatory approaches in terms of effectiveness and sustainability." (Tikare, et al, 2001) A broad-based consultative process in the formulation of the poverty reduction strategy that cuts across (political) party lines is more likely to survive a change in regime. A review of the PRS in 2002 indi- cated that participation initiatives were contributing to the realization of three critical objectives: (1) Enhancement of accountability and transparency, (2) Strengthening of equity, and (3) Improvement of public legitimacy and enforcement of new policies. Legislative debates can thus provide a platform for building consensus and facilitating decisions about policy trade-offs ­ which is crucial in an environ- ment where the demand for funds typically exceeds available resources, and difficult choices need to be made. 6 Katrina Sharkey, Theodore Dreger, and Sabina Bhatia 3. PRS Formulation and Implementation ­ Involvement of Parliamentarians This section reviews the involvement of legislators in the PRS process. On the basis of the information contained in the PRSPs submitted by countries, as well as the joint IMF-World Bank staff assess- ments/advisory notes, parliamentarians have been involved ton some degree during the preparatory phase. The extent of parliamentary involvement has differed across countries depending on the degree of openness and transparency in their respective governance processes. In several countries, multi- stakeholder working groups which included parliamentarians, were set up and were charged with fo- cusing on specific topics, such as education, health, water, and others (e.g. Malawi, Mali, Niger, Taji- kistan, and Zambia). In some cases, governments organized workshops, seminars, or conferences to disseminate information, as well as to obtain input for the PRSP (e.g. Cambodia, Ethiopia, Guinea, Kyrgyz Republic, Mauritania, Nicaragua, Senegal, Tanzania, and Yemen). In other cases, special con- sultations with parliaments were organized (e.g. Cambodia, The Gambia, Ghana, Niger, and Uganda). There is also evidence of parliaments playing a more formal role--the PRSP was submitted, dis- cussed, and, in some cases approved by the legislature (e.g. Benin, Burkina Faso, Guinea, Honduras, and Mauritania). PRSPs generally contain scant information on the extent of parliamentary input in the PRSP process. To some extent, this reflects the fact that the PRSP tends to be written by the executive, and therefore provides the executive's perspective on how the PRSP has evolved. It also reflects the fact that in many cases, parliaments played a token role in the consultative process, and were consulted only to- ward the end of the formulation process, when the PRSP was close to finalization, rather than throughout the process. Several studies have highlighted the need for greater parliamentary involvement. The Joint IMF/ World Bank review in 2002 indicated that the role of parliaments was growing, but was still limited. At around the same time, ActionAid noted "insufficient space for discussion and approval by parlia- ment and endorsement by interest groups on the content of the final PRSPs." The European Commis- sion recommended a more central role for parliaments in the PRS process, especially in the monitoring and implementation phases. A 2003 study on the PRSP process in Sub-Saharan Africa, commissioned by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development, concluded that the in- volvement by parliaments has been limited in scope and is the exception rather than the rule. A Member of Parliament (MP) in Ghana, Hon. Steve Akorli (2003), noted that, although the poverty reduction strategy process was launched in Ghana in 2000, it was not until almost a year later that members of parliament were involved in the process, and even then their involvement in setting priori- ties and determining policies was minimal. Hon. Akorli also argued that the decision by the govern- ment to apply for debt relief was taken without consulting parliament. Parliamentarians in Albania recognized that they have played a very marginal role in formulating the PRSP, and attributed this mainly to their lack of skills and expertise. Specifically, they pointed to the lack of access to inde- pendent economic analysis.2 In Uganda, too, parliamentarians complained that the lack of parliamen- 2Field visit to Albania by members of the Parliamentary Network on the World Bank (PNoWB), November 2002. See http://www.pnowb.org/html/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=17&mode=thread&orde r=0&thold=0 The Role of Legislatures in Poverty Reduction 7 tary input in formulating targets would likely adversely affect their ability to deliver results.3 An MP in Azerbaijan noted the need to deepen legislators' understanding of poverty and the concerns of the people they represent, and called for greater international support to strengthen legislative capacity and awareness.4 Despite the challenges, there are encouraging indications that parliaments' role in PRS oversight and implementation is growing. Parliaments are increasingly providing a bridge between policy impera- tives and needs articulated by constituencies. PRSPs have been formally presented to parliament in a significant number of the countries with full PRSPs. Several PRSPs highlight the role which parlia- ment is being asked to play in PRS oversight, either through a PRSP standing committee (e.g. Azer- baijan and Ghana), or through membership of PRSP Steering Committees managed by the executive branch (e.g. Chad and Georgia). The governments of Benin, Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan have been requested to provide regular reports to their parliaments on budget and PRSP progress. Box 1: Parliamentary Oversight of Ghana's Poverty Reduction Strategy (GPRS) Monitoring of poverty reduction results has emerged as a priority for Ghanaian MPs. A special Com- mittee on Poverty Reduction has been formed to consider and report to Parliament on the content, fo- cus and adequacy of the Poverty Reduction Strategy. The Committee draws its membership from five standing committees which specifically address poverty issues. Through a Community Monitoring Program on Poverty Reduction, which is administered by the Institute for Policy Alternatives, Tamale, Ghana, parliamentarians are monitoring the attainment of poverty reduction results at the constituency level, and there are plans for local government officials to carry out short-term secondments to parlia- ment in order to better understand the operation of the legislature. Ghanaian MPs are also engaged in the Capacity Strengthening Program (ACPSP) on poverty and expenditure management with support from the Canadian Parliamentary Center. The Centre for Budget Advocacy, an NGO, is working with District Assemblies to bring citizen's voice into the budget formulation process both at district and national levels. Parliaments are beginning to sharpen their focus on PRSP prioritization, costing, policy coordination, and monitoring of poverty outcomes. A growing number of parliaments are engaged in capacity building to monitor PRSP, MTEF and budget linkages, and to provide more targeted policy recom- mendations on the PRS to the executive branch (e.g. Burkina Faso and Cameroon). In some instances, parliaments are drawing resources from the PRSP Trust Fund (e.g. Tajikistan), or from other partner- supported programs (e.g. Ghana and Mongolia). With support from parliamentary associations worldwide, including the Parliamentary Network on the World Bank (PNoWB), informal networks have been formed in the East Africa, Middle East and Latin American regions. These networks strengthen parliament's ability to track the attainment of PRSP and millennium development goals, and to increase knowledge sharing on these issues. Parliamentarians are becoming more aware that systematic engagement with the constituency - through outreach activities, public hearings and citizen-friendly information bureaus ­ helps to refine the focus of policy feedback which parliament provides to policy makers. In Rwanda and Tanzania, opportunities for civil society to meet with committees and to attend public hearings prior to the pass- 3See interview with Manuel Pinto, former MP, Uganda. http://www.pnowb.org/html/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=30 4Interview with Eldar Gahramanov, MP, Azerbaijan. http://www.pnowb.org/html/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=19&mode=thread&orde r=0&thold=0 8 Katrina Sharkey, Theodore Dreger, and Sabina Bhatia ing of legislation have been institutionalized. In Mauritania, the National Assembly and Senate track progress of PRSP implementation through a review of annual progress reports, and parliamentarians participate in regular consensus building workshops which are convened to monitor progress at central and inter-regional levels. Direct engagement between parliamentarians and the constituency continues to be constrained by limited financial resources, weak parliamentary presence at the local level, dis- tance from the capital city and poor communications facilities. The 2005 study commissioned by the Federal German Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Devel- opment notes that "key oversight committees were working to see that Parliament played a major role in the monitoring process needed for PRSP results to be achieved. This is a major move forward from the origins of the PRSP, when Parliaments were much less assertive and largely excluded from the PRSP process. The oversight responsibility of Parliaments is now being emphasized, with demands that there be detailed involvement of key committee members in technical and implementation levels of monitoring work." The Role of Legislatures in Poverty Reduction 9 4. Constraints to Legislative Input in the PRSP Process As the above analysis indicates, there has been widespread acknowledgment by legislators themselves, CSOs, and some governments that greater involvement of legislatures is desirable. At the same time, the political rationale for inclusion or exclusion of legislatures in the PRSP process is country-specific. One reason for the low level of parliamentary participation in the PRSP could be a concern by the ex- ecutive that greater participation would set a precedent and create expectations for greater transpar- ency in other branches of government, including the judiciary. In fledgling democracies with capacity constraints, broad consultations may be difficult when the executive is working under tight deadlines to meet development targets under programs supported by international financial institutions. While the constraints differ from country to country, there are some common challenges that confront legisla- tors in developing countries. A. Constitutional capacity5 The relationship between the executive and the legislature is determined partly by the constitutional model --whether the country has a presidential, parliamentary, or a mixed presidential-parliamentary system. This has important implications for design of PRSP monitoring function of parliaments. The nature of mutual accountability between the executive and legislature varies in each of these forms of government. Mezey notes that both presidential systems and parliamentary systems (and hybrids) can range from those with relatively strong legislatures to those that are weak. Thus, while the constitu- tional form lays out a framework within which the executive and the legislature discharge their re- sponsibilities and describes the powers and prerogatives of each branch, it does not by itself explain whether or not the legislature will play a determinant role in shaping legislation. In examining the constitutional form of government, the critical question relates to the balance of power between the executive and the legislature, and the extent to which the legislature is able to monitor the actions of the executive. There are various ways in which the legislature can do this. For example, the legislature can amend or defeat legislation initiated by the executive, or it can compel the executive to account for its actions through parliamentary hearings or question/answer sessions, or the executive may modify or delay its proposals in anticipation of legislative reactions. The strategies that legislators choose depend in part on what the constitution allows them to do. Box 2 provides examples of different legislative practices in low-income countries. B. Political capacity As formulation of poverty reduction strategies takes place in a broader political context, the influence of parliament on policy formulation and budgetary action is to a large extent determined by political party dynamics. Meaningful engagement requires a political environment in which actors respect civil and political rights, and fundamental freedoms such as the conduct of periodic free and fair elections, freedom of expression, and the rule of law. Where these conditions are impaired, the independence of legislators can be severely undermined: for instance when opposition members of parliament are intimidated or 5This section draws on the work of Garry W. Copeland and Samuel C. Patterson, "Parliaments and Legisla- tures," and Michael L. Mezey, "Executive-Legislative Relations," in World Encyclopedia of Parliaments and Legislatures, edited by George Thomas Kurian, Washington D.C., Congressional Quarterly, 1998. 10 Katrina Sharkey, Theodore Dreger, and Sabina Bhatia threatened, or where electoral fraud is common, and in extreme cases where the legislature comprises the representatives of an authoritarian head of government.6 In countries with single-party systems, decisions are made by the governing party. The legislature has only one party and legislators are obliged to follow the party line. The power of legislatures then de- pends on how well defined the party line is, and on how disciplined the system and party are. In coun- tries with two-party systems, when the party that controls the executive branch also has majority con- trol over the legislature (assuming there is party discipline) the latter will support the former on most issues. This is true for both parliamentary and presidential systems. The situation is more complex in multiparty systems, especially when the governing party does not have a majority in the legislature, or where the executive has to rely on a broad coalition of parties for support. In these situations, the legislative arena tends to provide ample opportunity for bargaining across issues, and legislators may effectively be able to constrain executive power. Copeland and Pat- terson (1998) note that in multi-party systems, the legislature becomes the institution where prefer- ences are aggregated; in contrast, in a two-party system, the party becomes the vehicle for aggregating preferences. C. Technical Capacity The ability of legislators to play an effective role also depends on their expertise on relevant policy issues and the availability of resources (for example, availability of qualified staff and access to infor- mation and independent research). A key reason why the executive tends to dominate legislatures is that legislators often do not have access to the information or analytical capacities which are available to the executive branch of government. Some of the parliaments in PRSP countries have recently been established or reestablished--in some cases after long periods of military or single-party rule. A number of PRS countries are also affected by conflict, either being in the midst of unrest or emerging from a protracted war. Legislators, there- fore, lack the experience to engage in wide-ranging policy issues, and need to prioritize capacity build- ing exercises designed to overcome these shortcomings. Lesotho's National Assembly, for example, gave a basic orientation program to its members after the opening of its sixth parliament. The discus- sion covered diverse topics including parliament's functions, practices, procedures, and parliamentary powers and privileges. The lack of staff and resources limits parliaments' capacity to legislate. A permanent legislative staff is crucial for passing on institutional knowledge from one regime to the next. Unfortunately, legisla- tors in most PRSP countries have very few, if any, full-time staff. In Bolivia, legislative committees end up sharing support personnel lent to them from the central administrative service units of the chamber. Sometimes, they hire staff on short-term contracts. With no permanent staff, documentation is limited and few legislative reports of bills are produced. Parliaments often suffer from poor infra- structure and resources, such as libraries, communication facilities and information technology. Simi- larly, access to independent research is virtually non-existent.7 For example, institutions like the U.S. Congressional Budget Office or U.S. Congressional Research Service do not exist in most developing countries. A study by Mezey, Krafchik and Wehner also note that the existence of strong committees 6Wehner, Joachim (forthcoming) 7As a result, NGOs, especially those with expertise on particular issues (e.g. Uganda Debt Network, Afrodad) have filled a void by providing legislators with alternative analysis to that being provided by the authorities. The Role of Legislatures in Poverty Reduction 11 can also provide legislators with information they need to participate effectively with the executive across a range of policy issues. Well informed and competent committees can become centers of ex- pertise, providing legislators with guidance on how to handle complex technical issues. In PRSP coun- tries, committees experience the same capacity constraints faced by parliament as a whole, namely poor information, limited time to deliberate and little access to independent research. The lack of technical capacity is also highlighted in a 2005 study by GTZ and Parliamentary Centre, Canada: "While (the lack of) budget and financial control on the part of parliament might partly be due to political maneuvering on the part of the executive to by-pass parliament when it comes to matters of finance, this weakness is also due to the limited capacity on the part of MPs to implement detailed fi- nancial oversight with respect to the budget process. This is further worsened by lack of parliamen- tary resources; as a result, MPs and their Committees do not get the necessary staff support to effec- tively perform their financial oversight roles." While the executive branch generally proposes the budget, the legislature has the responsibility to ex- ercise oversight and to authorize expenditures and revenue-raising measures.8 Krafchik and Wehner argue that the ability of parliament to change the budget depends on whether it has the power of amendment, whether committees can suggest changes, whether there is sufficient committee time to scrutinize the budget, and whether committees have access to sufficient independent research on a timely basis. These prerequisites are often absent in PRSP countries. One factor that prevents parliaments from playing an effective role is their delayed involvement in the budget process. By the time the budget act is submitted to the legislature, legislators do not have the time to fully examine the assumptions and implications of the various measures. In addition, the type of information submitted to parliament makes it difficult for its members to understand, absorb, and decide on the issue, which hampers effective parliamentary debate. A study (Fozzard and Naschold, 2002) of Tanzania's poverty reduction strategy notes, "it is noteworthy that much of the documenta- tion submitted to and discussed with the donor community... is not formally submitted to Parliament. Neither forward estimates of resources and expenditures nor revenue estimates are subjected to Par- liamentary debate and approval." There are inherent asymmetries in information--the finance ministry usually knows a lot more about the budget than parliament (Schick, 2002). The combined effect of the information asymmetry and short deadlines puts legislatures at a serious disadvantage. However, a 2004 update prepared by the ODI suggests that as part of the PRSP review process in Tanzania "...there has been interest within the government to use the review process to institutionalize key PRS principles and develop them into a national development plan that has stronger Cabinet backing and greater public awareness." And for the first time, the Ministry of Finance submitted the budget to par- liament this year in the context of a parliamentary briefing ahead of the formal introduction, thus breaking with past practice of just sending the budget to MPs the day before the debate and vote on the budget. D. Timely access to information The information imbalance between the legislative and executive functions is often large in PRSP countries. This hinders the ability of legislators to participate effectively. Moreover, in most PRSP 8In some countries, the legislature has the right to reduce and increase expenditures and revenues; in some coun- tries, it can reduce, but not increase, expenditures, and in yet other countries it can reduce and increase expendi- tures if it provides off-setting measures elsewhere. In some countries, the rights of the legislature in this regard are not specified. (see Krafchik and Wehner). 12 Katrina Sharkey, Theodore Dreger, and Sabina Bhatia countries, the legislators do not have research staff at their disposal to analyze specific topics and thereby prepare a more meaningful discussion in the PRSP process. In their oversight function too, the audit of government accounts is often not completed in a timely manner -- often there is a significant time lag from the end of a fiscal year. This lack of relevant and timely information hampers the efficacy of the necessary checks and balances. Even when such information becomes available on time, it is often very technical in nature, which renders the available information difficult to use. As noted in the previous section, in some political systems, policy formation and debate occur at the level of the party--and not in the legislative arena. This is all the more so in countries which have re- cently emerged from long periods of single-party or autocratic rule, as a result of which legislators have little experience with independent oversight functions. Finally, the role that legislators are able to play in PRS depends on how debates and differences of view are handled. In some countries, the power of the legislature may be severely hampered by fre- quent boycotts by the opposition. Boycotts by a large number of legislators can deprive the legislature of a quorum, thereby crippling legislative activity. Box 2. Examples of Different Legislative Practices in Low-Income Countries In Guyana, a bill only becomes law if the President assents to it. If he/she does not, it can be sent back to the National Assembly, which can then vote with 2/3 majority to return it to the President for reconsideration. If the President is still not satisfied, he has to dissolve parliament. In Mozambique, the government's program is evaluated by the Assembly at the beginning of each legislative session. Rejection by the legislature allows the government to dissolve parliament. In Armenia, rejection of the prime minister appointed by the president is grounds for dissolving parliament. The Tanzanian constitution considers dissolution as a way to allow the citizenry to decide directly on issues where the President and the parliament do not agree. In these circumstances, the parliament is dissolved and new parliamentary and presidential elections are held. In Azerbaijan, the president can appoint and remove the prime minister and cabinet ministers at will. Also, it is difficult for the legislature to impeach the president. In Senegal, the government has the power to bypass the legislature by submitting bills to a national referendum. In Cameroon, the president has the authority to reduce the term of parliament. Also, the National Assembly can give the president the power to make his/her own laws by means of an ordinance or decree for a limited period or for a given purpose. The constitutions of Kyrgyz Re- public, Madagascar, and Senegal allow Parliament to determine only basic or enabling legislation. Specific bills are left to the cabinet and the head of government. The Role of Legislatures in Poverty Reduction 13 5. Conclusions and Next Steps In the period 2000-05, there has been a growing demand from parliaments for more knowledge about the poverty reduction strategy process and, specifically, about how the institution of parliament might become more engaged in the process. In response, the World Bank group and IMF have initiated a series of measures to support parliamentary awareness and skills with respect to poverty reduction oversight. The World Bank Institute (WBI) and the Parliamentary Centre in Canada developed a Handbook for Parliamentarians on the poverty reduction strategy process. WBI and United Nations Development Program jointly launched a collaborative program aimed at raising the awareness of par- liamentarians about the PRS process and helping them devise strategies for greater parliamentary in- volvement in the process. More broadly, the Bank has conducted a training program9 on "Parliaments, Governance and the PRSP", which used workshops and distance learning, was held for MPs in several countries, while additional seminars and workshops have been held for parliamentarians from Latin America and the Caribbean, the CIS countries, South Asia and Francophone Africa. In recent years, the IMF has organized seminars and workshops for parliamentarians from various PRSP countries (e.g. Kenya, Tanzania, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Lao P.D.R., Vietnam, and Cambodia), aimed at promoting discussion of macroeconomic issues and the PRS. In 2003, the IMF established a Work- ing Group of Executive Directors, who looked at how the IMF could enhance its dialogue with na- tional legislatures on macroeconomic issues. In line with the recommendations of the working group, the IMF recently published a guide for staff outreach to legislators. Despite these efforts there remain important challenges to parliamentary engagement in the PRS proc- ess, including: - Capacity development for MPs and their staff, especially with respect to economic and sectoral issues, as well as negotiation skills - Building networks among parliaments and coalitions between parliaments and civil society. At a recent conference organized by the Parliamentary Network on the World Bank and the Austrian Development Agency, parliamentarians agreed to create a "network of networks" to facilitate col- laboration and information sharing among parliamentarians.10 - Working with MPs on freedom of information and freedom of association legislation - Improving the quality of poverty data and general information available to parliament - Developing strategies and channels of communication between MPs and their constituents, and between MPs and the executive branch of government. The World Bank and IMF recognize that most developing country parliaments can benefit from im- proved institutional capacities and infrastructure in order to perform their core functions of legislation, oversight and representation11 more effectively. Increasingly, World Bank grants, credits and loans are being made available to help parliaments fulfill these constitutionally-mandated functions12. 9 With financial support from the governments of Belgium, Canada, Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom 10For more information on the conference see: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/2005/070405.pdf and http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTABOUTUS/PARTNERS/EXTPARLIAMENTARIANS/0 ,,menuPK:64165869~pagePK:64165874~piPK:64165885~theSitePK:464534,00.html 11Functions very relevant to the formulation, implementation and monitoring of poverty reduction strategies 12E.g. in Ghana, Guinea, Malawi, Nigeria, Kenya, Pakistan, Rwanda, Sri Lanka and Tanzania 14 Katrina Sharkey, Theodore Dreger, and Sabina Bhatia The IMF and the World Bank can continue to play a useful role in strengthening parliamentary in- volvement in PRS processes ­ in a similar fashion to bilateral donors and other organizations - espe- cially in those areas in which they retain a comparative advantage of expertise. Some of the possible approaches include: Provision of analysis: Legislators need to be able to interpret and take a position based on available information. It is therefore useful for legislators to have access to short notes on key issues at critical junctures during the PRSP process. The World Bank and IMF will continue to disclose easy-to-understand papers on technical and economic issues. Development of a "One Source" website: Multilateral agencies have a wide variety of data pertaining to various aspects of a country's social and economic progress. However, the sta- tistics and analysis are available on the websites of these individual multilateral agencies, not through a single website. It would be useful to consider developing a website to provide coun- try information at one location from many institutions, including the World Bank, IMF, UN organizations, and others. Making useful data and information readily available to parliamen- tarians, civil society, and other stakeholder organizations at little or no cost can enhance the quality of their contribution to the PRSP process. Provision of information in print: For most low-income countries, internet access is limited; hence, pro-active dissemination of relevant hard copy material from Bank and IMF country offices to the legislatures' libraries, where they exist, would be useful. Legislators from ad- vanced countries can also help by sharing best practices, helping legislatures in low-income countries set up libraries, research centers, independent budget offices, and other institutions that can enhance legislative capacity. Capacity Development: IFIs and some advanced country parliaments (for example, the Cana- dian, French and UK parliaments) have worked in partnership on training and capacity build- ing seminars for legislators. These events prove to be a useful platform not only for building legislative capacity, but also as a sounding board for the constraints faced by legislators in various countries. Such activities can be custom built to respond to the needs of the audience, starting from the very basic introduction to economic or social measurement concepts to more technical discussion of topics. Facilitating Dialogue: It would be useful to strengthen the dialogue between IFIs and legisla- tures. It would also be helpful to increase the support for sharing best practices among legisla- tors from various countries. Initiatives such as those taken by the Parliamentary Network on the World Bank, Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, Inter-Parliamentary Union, and other inter-parliamentary bodies can facilitate the dialogue. Lastly, while awareness-raising still forms part of the work of the World Bank program, recent efforts have also moved towards capacity building. WBI's Parliamentary Strengthening Program works closely with the Bank's Poverty Reduction unit to support the building of parliamentary awareness and oversight of poverty reduction strategy processes. The IMF will continue to expand its dialogue with parliamentarians on PRS issues through workshops and seminars. These efforts will need to continue for some time, if the challenge of stakeholder participation in the poverty reduction strategy process is to be overcome. The Role of Legislatures in Poverty Reduction 15 Bibliography ActionAid (2002) Inclusive Circles Lost in Exclusive Cycles. Action Aid Policy Brief on PRS, Wash- ington DC http://www.actionaidusa.org/pdf/Inclusive%20circles.pdf Akroli, Steve, (2003) The Role of Parliament in PRSPs: The Ghanaian Experience," paper presented at the Fourth Annual Conference of the PNoWB, Athens, March 9-10, 2003 (unpublished). Copeland, Garry W. and Patterson, Samuel C., "Parliaments and Legislatures," and Michael L. Mezey, "Executive-Legislative Relations," in World Encyclopedia of Parliaments and Legislatures, edited by George Thomas Kurian, Washington D.C., Congressional Quarterly, 1998 Donnelly-Roark, Paula, (2002) Mainstreaming Participation in the PRSP, World Bank, Washington DC. http://www.worldbank.org/participation/PRSP/PRSPparticipation2002.pdf European Commission (2001), PRSP Review: Key Issues. Brussels http://europa.eu.int/comm/development/body/theme/poverty_reduction/infopack_ann2.pdf#zoom=100 Eberlei, W. and H. Henn. (2003) Parliaments in Sub-Saharan Africa: Actors in Poverty Reduction? German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development, http://inef.uni-duisburg.de/page/documents/Parliaments_(2003).pdf Fozzard, Adrian and F. Naschold. (2002) Poverty Reduction Strategy and Public Expenditure in Tan- zania, Overseas Development Institute, UK, WP No. 165 http://www.odi.org.uk/pppg/publications/working_papers/165.pdf Draman, Rashid and S. Landon. (2005) PRSPs in Africa: Parliaments and Economic Policy Perform- ance. GTZ and Parliamentary Centre, Eschborn http://www.parlcent.ca/africa/papers/GTZ%20Final%20Publication_EN.pdf International Monetary Fund. (2002) Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers ­ Progress in Implementa- tion, IMF and the World Bank, Washington DC. http://www.imf.org/external/np/prspgen/2002/eng/091102.pdf International Monetary Fund. (2004) Report of the Working Group of IMF Executive Directors on En- hancing Communication with National Legislators. Washington, DC http://www.imf.org/external/np/ed/2004/ecnl/ International Monetary Fund (2005) Guide for IMF Staff Outreach to Legislators, Washington D.C. http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/leg//eng/guide.htm Inter-Parliamentary Union (2002) Summary of the Proceedings: Parliament and the budgetary proc- ess, including from a gender perspective, Regional Seminar on the National Budget, Manila http://www.ipu.org/splz-e/manila02/report-e.pdf 16 Katrina Sharkey, Theodore Dreger, and Sabina Bhatia Krafchik, Warren and J. Wehner (undated) The Role of Parliament in the Budget Process. Institute for Democracy in South Africa http://www.undp.org/governance/docspublications/policy_dialogue/12_The_Role_of_Parliaments.pdf Overseas Development Institute, PRSP Connections ­ February 2004 update, London, UK http://www.prspsynthesis.org/connections%2010.pdf Schick, Allen. 2002. The Performing State: Reflection on an Idea Whose Time has Come but whose Implementation has not, Paper presented at the OECD Global Forum on Governance, London, p14. Stapenhurst, F. C. and R. Pelizzo. 2002. A Bigger Role for Legislatures. Finance and Development 39(4): 46-48. http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2002/12/stapenhu.htm Thakalekoala, Thabo. (July 18, 2002) MPs on Orientation Course. Mopheme/ The Survivor, Lesotho Tikare, S., K. McLean, J. Edgerton, and P. Shah. (2001) Participatory Processes in Poverty Reduction Strategies, World Bank Technical Notes, World Bank, Washington DC. Wehner, Joachim (2004) Effective Financial Scrutiny: The Role of Parliament in Public Finance. World Bank Institute Training Module