Question 114

In the past 12 months, did a committee of the legislature examine in-year implementation of the Enacted Budget during the relevant budget execution period?
 * a. Yes, a committee examined in-year implementation on at least three occasions during a fiscal year, and it published reports with findings and recommendations.
 * b. Yes, a committee examined in-year implementation on one or more occasion (but less than three times), and it published a report with findings and recommendations.
 * c. Yes, a committee examined in-year implementation, but it did not publish any report with findings and recommendations.
 * d. No, a committee did not examine in-year implementation.
 * e. Not applicable/other (please comment).

OBS Guidelines
Question 114 is about legislative oversight of budget execution. It assesses whether and how often a committee examined the implementation of the budget during the budget execution period (i.e., financial year) for which it was approved, and whether this resulted in an official report with findings and recommendations. This question does not apply to the ex post review of implementation following the end of the budget year as part of the audit stage, which is assessed separately. Nor does it apply to the legislature’s review of the budget that it may undertake as part of the process of considering a supplemental budget during the year. In-year monitoring by the legislature will be affected by the frequency that the executive publishes In-Year Reports.

To answer “a,” a committee must have examined in-year implementation of the Enacted Budget at least three times during the course of the relevant budget year and published reports with findings and recommendations. Answer “b” applies where this occurred only once or twice during the year.

Exception: If a legislature is in session only twice during the year, and it examines the implementation of the budget during both sessions, then it would be eligible for an “a” response.

Choose “c” if a committee examined in-year implementation (without regard to frequency), but did not publish any report with findings and recommendations. Answer “d” applies where no committee examined in-year implementation.

If the answer is “a” or “b,” please specify the name of the committee and when it reviewed budget implementation, and provide a copy of its report(s). If the answer is “c,” please specify the name of the committee and when it reviewed budget implementation.

For purposes of responding to this question, if more than one committee holds in-year reviews of the budget, use the committee that is best performing – that is, the one that examines in-year implementation the most times and that publishes a report.

Which fiscal year to use?
The question explicitly asks about the legislative committee’s behavior in the last 12 months. However, in the last 12 months, in Croatia, the relevant Committee has not examined any in-year implementation of enacted budget; but there were two national elections in the past 12 months as well, so Parliament was not very active for those “exceptional” reasons.

Joel/Elena agreed: Since we are using the 2016 IYRs/execution reports, we expect to assess Parliament on 2016 on this question.

Open questions:
 * What about how we treated the situations in previous years? We have worked around anomalies in the past, but how? (for instance, elections were part of the problem in South Asia last round, but we did not cut them any slack).
 * What do we typically do in other countries that face a disruption in their budget process due to elections or other political events (and how do we know when an event is large enough to qualify and that it will be one-time)?

If you come across this situation, please bring it up to the team.

Examination of budget execution reports not included/accepted in Section 1
If legislature reviews IYRs that are not used/accepted in Section 1 of the Survey ==> we still give them points, because here we are trying to measure its role in monitoring and overseeing budget execution, regardless of which reports it considers. Honduras