|
The purpose of this study was to provide a basis for developing advocacy messages for the priority setting of poverty
eradication on the national agenda. The study was prompted by an observable worrying trend in the allocation and disbursements
of budgetary funds to Poverty Reduction Programmes (PRPs). This trend can only be translated as inadequate commitment from
Government and cooperating partners to the cause of poverty eradication. CSPR feels that there has been lack of political will,
poor fiscal management, and low level targeting, leading to diversion of resources meant for poverty reduction as well as
non-prioritization of the poverty eradication agenda.
Executive summary
The purpose of this study was to provide a basis for developing advocacy messages for the
priority setting of poverty eradication on the national agenda. The study was prompted by an
observable worrying trend in the allocation and disbursements of budgetary funds to Poverty
Reduction Programs (PRPs). This trend can only be translated as inadequate commitment
from Government and cooperating partners to the cause of poverty eradication. CSPR feels
that there has been lack of political will, poor fiscal management, and low level targeting
leading to diversion of resources meant for poverty reduction as well as non-prioritization of
the poverty eradication agenda.
To gauge the extent to which the Zambian Government has prioritized poverty reduction on
the national development agenda, it is necessary to look beyond policy pronouncements and
analyze the processes of actualizing stated intentions into concrete programs and activities.
To the degree that Zambia’s PRSP has been well received by the key stakeholders, to that
degree, it can be said that the Government has clearly prioritized poverty reduction. Agreeing
on what needs to be done, however, is one thing, getting to actually do it is another. Firstly,
there is an urgent need to rethink the formulation of Zambia’s macroeconomic policy
framework in order to make poverty reduction an integral part of its objectives. Unfortunately
for the poor of Zambia, Government has not demonstrated willingness to share control over
the all important issues of fiscal and monetary policies. Secondly, there has been no
reorientation in Government expenditure patterns to accord poverty reduction high priority.
This study is proposing that to prioritize poverty eradication on the national agenda, there is
need to undertake the following measures:
-
Ministry of Finance should make poverty reduction an explicit objective of
macroeconomic policy with quantifiable and monitorable indicators in the annual
budget.
-
Formulation of macroeconomic policy objectives should not be restricted to
Government and the multilateral financial institutions. There is need for national debate
on key macroeconomic objectives.
-
Government must conduct a Poverty and Social Impact Assessment of its
macroeconomic objectives and suggest compensatory measures to losers.
-
Expenditure patterns in the national budget must begin to change to reflect priority
given to the PRSP sectors.
-
PRP allocations must be timely disbursed and in full.
-
Overally there’s need to undertake reforms in the structure of the national budget in
order to transform it into a tool for achieving the PRSP goal of poverty reduction.
The study observed that, whereas the formulation of the PRSP has opened up a new avenue
of broadening the circle of participation in decision-making in national development, this
prospect, however, can only become a reality if Parliament and Civil Society participate more
meaningfully in this process than the case has been hitherto. It is important that, as
preparations for the second cycle of the PRSP commence, the people’s elected
representatives and civil society, exert more influence on the process. This may entail
reviewing the current legal framework in which Parliament fulfills its public finances
oversight. On the other hand, Civil Society participation in the poverty reduction process will need to go beyond being merely consulted and embrace joint decision-making, initiation and
control. Additionally, there will also be need to decentralize participation from the capital to
the provinces, districts, and sub-districts. To this effect, this study is proposing the following:
-
Review and amend legislation that regulates the National Assembly’s role in matters of
public finances management in order to give greater voice to the National Assembly
than has been the case hitherto.
-
No budget lines allocated to poverty reduction should be moved to another concern-no
matter the pressure on Government to look for funds to meet a “non-poverty reduction”
concern.
-
Pass legislation on Public Access to Information with explicit provision on “access to
information on international agreements on finance and development.”
-
Set up a special departmentally related Parliamentary committee to oversee the
implementation of the PRSP.
-
Auditor-General should undertake special audit of the utilization of PRP funds on an
annual basis.
-
Devolve Civil Society participation in the implementation of the PRSP to provincial,
district and sub-district levels.
-
CSPR must coordinate Civil Society participation in the Sector Advisory Groups in
order to ensure pursuit of a common vision and objectives.
The study further observed that there is need to devise a mechanism that would enable
external aid flows earmarked for PRPs to continue even during times of uncertainties brought
about by Government’s failure to comply with donor conditionalities. Zambia’s precarious
financial situation as a result of its unsustainable external debt has made it a hostage to donor
influence. Zambia needs donors for both its development programs and debt relief. There is
concern, however, that the relationship between Zambia and its donors is not leading to
sustainable solutions to both its external debt problem and rampant poverty. The strong links
between financing of the PRSP and the HIPC Initiative have taken the initiative to drive the
development agenda out of the Government hands. In the event that the Zambian
Government fails to observe donor conditionalities, poverty reduction programs suffer
through withholding of pledged financial assistance. Moreover, the proliferation of donor
funded activities imposes a serious administrative burden on the already overstretched
capacity of the public service. This speaks of the need to better coordinate donor programs
and align them with the priorities identified in the PRSP. The study is therefore proposing the
following measures:
-
Donor funding of the PRSP should be delinked from conditionalities surrounding
Zambia’s attainment of the HIPC Completion Point.
-
Donors should include Civil Society in discussions centred on policy based lending
programs (e.g. PRGF).
-
Donor support to strengthening the Public Expenditure Management and Financial
Accountability systems should be accompanied by commitment to Direct Budget
Support and Sector-Wide Approaches.
-
Donors should seriously consider total debt cancellation as proposed by Jubilee-
Zambia.
-
Donors should support Civil Society’s calls for establishment of a Debt Mechanism.
Another conclusion of the study is that, priority setting of poverty eradication on the national
agenda requires the participation of key stakeholders, including Civil Society in the entire
PRPs cycle. The study looks at participation as a process that can be distinguished by four
successive stages, namely, information-sharing, consultation, joint-decision making and,
initiation and control by stakeholders. The PRSP is a three year rolling plan which presents
civil society with the possibility of strengthening its participation in poverty reduction
activities over time. This participation should, however, be viewed as an on-going process.
The study therefore proposes possible entry points for strengthened civil society participation
in decisions of allocations, disbursements, monitoring and evaluation of poverty eradication
funds. In this regard, the study makes the following specific recommendations:
-
Aim for strong institutionalized participation based on sound legal frameworks.
-
Be guided by a dynamic common civil society perspective to avoid being used by
Government to just validate its own programs.
-
CSPR coordinated civil society participation in Sector Advisory Groups.
-
Fight for access to timely released information.
-
Build capacities of civil society constituencies in budget work.
In addition, the study has proposed the following specific entry points based on Walter
Eberlei’s analysis for Civil Society to engage donors in matters of decision-making regarding
poverty reduction:
-
PRS cycles-because the PRSP is envisaged as a three year rolling plan, civil society
would do well to ready itself for participation in the formulation and implementation of
each cycle, always preparing itself with quality analysis and hindsight knowledge
gained from the preceding cycle.
-
Budget cycles-annual national budget preparation is another important entry point
which civil society can participate in to ensure that budget objectives and policies
reflect priorities of poverty reduction and pro-poor programs.
-
Macro-economic policy planning-this is yet another crucial area for pro-poor planning.
-
Sectoral development policies-as the shift is made from project planning to sector-wide
approaches, civil society could contribute to upholding of the pro-poor agenda by
participating in planning activities.
-
Political processes at sub-national level- here the critical issue is the implementation of
the decentralization policy.
The study also examined strategies and mechanisms for protecting resources meant for
poverty eradication in terms of legal provision and budget execution. The single most
important strategy for protecting poverty reduction funds is to get Government to commit
itself to disbursing poverty reduction allocations in full and on time, regardless of the
prevailing fiscal situation. This can not happen unless there’s strong political will from key
decision makers, such as the President and Parliament. The Debt mechanism proposed by
Jubilee-Zambia is a good starting point for initiating this process. Uganda’s experience with
its Poverty Action Fund is a clear demonstration that such arrangements can work. The study
is therefore recommending the following measures:
-
Cultivate political will from the President, Cabinet, National Assembly and opposition
political parties.
-
Advocate for strengthening of institutional capacities at the Ministry of Finance and
National Planning, Provinces and Districts to effectively prioritize and implement
poverty reduction programs.
-
Advocate for timely and full disbursement of poverty reduction funds.
-
Establish a Debt Mechanism as proposed by Jubilee-Zambia.
-
Advocate for increased funding to Ministry of Community Development and Social
Services to design better, well targeted and adequately funded Public Welfare
Assistance Scheme.
-
Learn from the case of Uganda’s Poverty Action Fund.
|
|
- 237Kb ~ 1 min (48 pages)
