Question 138

Does the legislature provide feedback to the public on how citizens’ inputs have been used during legislative deliberations on the annual budget?


 * a. Yes, the legislature provides a written record which includes both the list of the inputs received from the public and a detailed report of how the inputs were used during legislative deliberations on the budget.
 * b. Yes, the legislature provides a written record which includes both the list of inputs received and a summary of the how the inputs were used.
 * c. Yes, the legislature provides a written record which includes either the list of the inputs received or a report or summary on how they were used.
 * d. The requirements for a “c” response or above are not met.
 * e. Not applicable (please comment).

OBS Guidelines
This question reflects the GIFT principles of “Transparency” and “Sustainability”, and examines the extent to which the legislature provides information to citizens on which public inputs were received and how inputs were used during legislative deliberations (please note that these deliberations can refer to the pre-budget and approval phases). By “written record” in this question, we mean a document that is produced and released by the legislature.

Answer “a” applies when the legislature provides a written document with:
 * The inputs received from the public (e.g., a written transcript) and
 * A detailed report on how the inputs were used or not used (such report should include information on which inputs were used or not used, why, and how).

Answer “b” applies when the legislature provides a written document that includes:
 * The inputs received from the public (e.g., a written transcript) and
 * A not-so-detailed report on how public inputs were used or not used. This document only gives a general idea on how those inputs were used or not used in legislative deliberations on the annual budget (please note that these deliberations refer to the pre-budget and approval phases).

Answer “c” applies when the legislature makes available a video recording of the relevant legislative session or provides a written document that includes:
 * The inputs received from the public (e.g., a written transcript) or
 * A report (being it detailed or not-so-detailed) on how public inputs have been used or not used.

Answer “d” applies if the requirements for a “c” response or above are not met or if the legislature does not use public participation mechanisms during its deliberations on the annual budget.

1) A summary of consultations
Some countries simply provide a summary of the consultations without any reference to how the inputs were or were not used and why. If there is a summary of the consultations, we could go with a “c” response and be consistent. While this is far from ideal, in OBS 2017 there were only a handful of countries that provided as little as a summary report. By acknowledging the summary report, we could acknowledge at least the transparency in consultations.

2) If there are references to the impact of public consultations in unconventional places, like a budget speech or a blog on the agencies website, how should we score?
Please bring such cases to the team. Once established that it is in reference to same participation mechanism we are citing, we could go with a “c” score. However, we should be more demanding in terms of linking the participation mechanism to some meaningful outcome in the budget.

4) What counts as a written record?
As long as it includes inputs received, a record can include meeting minutes, transcripts, or even a video recording, as long as the video recording is publicly available (on the website at all times). We should mention in comments and score according to past practice of at least the last 2 years.