2012年-世界发展银行全球_Pakistan_Federal_Government___Public_Financial_Management_and_Accountability_Assessment_84页_3mb

Summary Assessment of Public Financial Management and Accountability in Pakistan (June 2012)

Core Content

This report is a Public Financial Management and Accountability Assessment (PFMAA) for the Federal Government of Pakistan, updating the 2009 assessment (Report No. 48652-PK). It evaluates the performance of the public financial management (PFM) system against six core objectives and provides a comprehensive analysis of the system's strengths, weaknesses, and areas requiring reform.

Main Points

1. Integrated Assessment of PFM Performance

a. Credibility of the Budget (PI 1-4)

• Budget credibility has improved, with the Federal Government's aggregate expenditure predictability moving from a 'D' to a 'B' over three years.
• However, significant deviations at the disaggregated level remain, mainly due to economic challenges such as floods and law and order expenses.
• Debt servicing, inflation, and economic instability have constrained fiscal outcomes.
• The frequent use of supplementary budgets and re-appropriations undermines budget credibility despite constitutional allowance.

b. Comprehensiveness and Transparency (PI 5-10)

• Budget transparency and comprehensiveness have remained largely unchanged.
• Public availability of fiscal information has improved, with data accessible on the MoF website and in media.
• Unreported foreign assistance and monitoring of fiscal risk remain key concerns.
• Donors have not consistently provided timely and complete information on aid flows, affecting transparency.

c. Policy-Based Budgeting (PI 11-12)

• A clear annual budget calendar and timely legislative approval suggest well-defined budgeting processes.
• The implementation of the Medium Term Budget Framework (MTBF) has contributed to improved ratings.
• Linkages between multi-year estimates and annual budget ceilings need strengthening.

d. Predictability and Control in Budget Execution (PI 13-21)

• There have been some improvements in predictability and control, but performance remains weak for most indicators.
• Taxpayer registration and tax collection are major issues.
• Procurement and internal audit practices are weak, with no progress in internal audit.
• Military expenditure controls are strong, but civilian payroll audits need attention.

e. Accounting, Recording and Reporting (PI 22-25)

• Sub-indicator-level improvements have been noted, but overall scores have declined.
• Introduction of GFMIS and the New Accounting Model (NAM) has improved transparency, but reconciliation differences and incomplete financial reporting persist.
• Annual financial statements are timely but lack comprehensive data on assets and liabilities.

f. External Scrutiny and Audit (PI 26-28)

• External audit practices have improved, but legislative scrutiny is still weak.
• The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has reviewed a backlog of audit reports, but recent reports remain delayed.
• The review process for audit reports is still hindered by a large backlog.

g. Donor Practices (DI 1-3)

• Donor budgetary support has exceeded estimates in the past three years.
• Most donors provide timely information, except USAID, which has a poor score due to lack of detailed breakdowns.
• The proportion of aid managed through national procedures has declined significantly.

Key Findings

• Budget Credibility: Improved at the aggregate level but remains weak at the disaggregated level.
• Transparency and Comprehensiveness: Improved in public access to fiscal information but unreported foreign assistance and fiscal risk monitoring are still problematic.
• Policy-Based Budgeting: Strong with the implementation of MTBF, but linkages between multi-year estimates and annual ceilings need improvement.
• Budget Execution: Remains fragile with poor performance in tax collection, procurement, and internal audit.
• Accounting and Reporting: Improved at sub-indicator level but lacks comprehensive data and timely reconciliation.
• External Audit and Scrutiny: Improved in audit timeliness and quality but legislative review is still inadequate.
• Donor Practices: Most donors are compliant, but USAID's lack of detailed reporting has affected scores.

Prospects for Reform

• The Federal Government has a continuing agenda of PFM reform, focusing on areas identified by the Government and Development Partners.
• Major reforms include the implementation of MTBF, GFMIS, and the establishment of the Procurement Regulatory Authority.
• Strengthening internal controls and procurement practices is critical to improving fiscal discipline and aligning with international standards.
• Ownership and sustainability of reform programs are essential for long-term success.

Conclusion

The assessment highlights both progress and persistent challenges in Pakistan's PFM system. While some areas have seen improvement, others require urgent attention to ensure better fiscal outcomes and public accountability. Continued collaboration with development partners and a focus on internal controls, procurement, and legislative scrutiny are necessary for further reform.