1. Kyiv, 20 May 2017 Franklin De Vrieze
Parliament transparency and budget Recent observations from South East and East Europe
  Kyiv, 20 May Franklin De Vrieze

2. Knowledge and oversight of international funds
Transparency of international parliamentary cooperation in South East Europe
Transparency and oversight over national budgets in Western Balkans
CSO engagement in national budget process in Georgia

3. Knowledge and oversight of international funds (1)
Network of Parliamentary Committees (NPC) of Economy, Finance and European Integration of Western Balkans
Toolkit on parliamentary budget oversight in Western Balkans.
Public oversight hearings on management of funds of IPA (Instrument for Pre-Accession to EU)

4. Knowledge and oversight of international funds (2)
Identifying key issues emerging from the IPA oversight: pre-financing and co-financing of IPA projects, absorption capacity of IPA funds at local level, need to raise public awareness on benefits of IPA assistance
Recommendations to Executives on accessing and administering IPA funds, on annual report to parliament on utilization of IPA funds.
Regional networks are entry point for bilateral engagement, with concrete results (for instance: negotiated budget agreement on infrastructure Montenegro-Albania)
Knowledge sharing, skills transfer and coaching contributes to strong PBO, with budget analysis used in plenary debate (Serbia).

5. Transparency of international parliamentary cooperation in SEE (1)
Parliamentary Assembly of the Mediterranean (PAM)
Western Balkans Conference of the Committees on European Integration/Affairs of the States participating in the Stabilisation and Association Process (COSAP)
Conference of Foreign Affairs Committees (CFAC)
NATO Parliamentary Assembly (NATO PA)
Parliamentary Assembly of Organization of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (PABSEC)
Parliamentary Assembly of the Union for the Mediterranean (PA-UfM)
SEECP Parliamentary Assembly (SEECP PA)
Parliamentary Dimension of the Adriatic-Ionian Initiative (AII-PD)
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE)
OSCE Parliamentary Assembly (OSCE PA)
Parliamentary Dimension of the Central European Initiative (CEI-PD)
Cetinje Parliamentary Forum (CPF)
Danube Parliamentarians Conference (DPC)
Conference of Speakers of Parliament of Western Balkans (CSPWB)
Network of Parliamentary Committees on Economy, Finance and European Integration of the Western Balkans (NPC)

6. Transparency of international parliamentary cooperation in SEE (2)
7 of selected Int. Parl. Institutions (IPIs) and parliamentary networks have own website.
Only in 1 case, draft documents are publicly available.
14 IPIs and networks make final documents publicly available.
In 11 cases the plenary meetings are open to public.
Committee meetings are generally closed, except in 1 case.
Few possibility for public / CSOs to comment on draft reports.
PMOs do not follow the work of the regional assemblies
The budget of IPIs & parl. networks are not publicly accessible.

7. Transparency and oversight over national budgets in Western Balkans
“Action SEE” is consortium of 6 CSOs from W. Balkans + WFD
“Regional Openness Index” measures degree to which institutions in Western Balkans are open to citizens and society.
Based upon: Declaration on Parliamentary Openness
Institutions measured: Parliament, Executive, Courts, Local self-governments, and independent agencies.
Research results to be launched next week in Sarajevo, co-organized with OGP
Country road maps and regional road maps to be consulted in time ahead.

10. CSO engagement in national budget process in Georgia (1)
Georgia Parliament Committees engaged in the budget cycle and engaged different stakeholders such as CSOs, State Audit Office (SAO) and Government Agencies in budgetary process.
Government sends to parliament Basic Data and Directions (BDD) document, outlining plans and priorities for all sectors for the next 3 years.
Engagement with CSOs at the policy formation level (through discussing the BDD document for the first time) as well as the budget consideration level (by discussing the draft budgets).
Staff of SAO and staff of parliamentary committees discussed performance audit reports
Recommendations presented by CSOs were incorporated into the committees’ conclusions for the Government.
Incremental Committee interest, from 4 to 6-7 committees.

11. CSO engagement in national budget process in Georgia (2)
Challenges related to low understanding of CSOs towards budgetary issues and varying level of ability within committees
Enhanced collaboration between Committees and CSOs resulted in better consulted budgets
Committees became more critical and structured in feedback to the Government, resulting in stronger parliamentary oversight
Enhanced collaboration with State Audit Office contributed to more focused subject oriented discussions in parliament
Better quality recommendations and conclusions by the committees on draft budgets as well as on quarterly reports on budget execution.
[part of WFD-UNDP-EU parl. program, coop. with USAID & GIZ.]