Tbilisi, 23 January, 2013 - Transparency International Georgia (TI Georgia) and the Minister of Finance held a joint press conference at the Ministry of Finance where TI Georgia presented the findings of 2012 Open Budget Index (OBI) and a list of recommendations for Georgia. Georgia scores 55 out of 100 in OBI 2012, which is higher than the average score of 43 for all 100 countries surveyed, according to a major biennial global report released today by the International Budget Partnership. This means that the Georgian government provides its citizens with only some information on the country’s state budget and financial activities, making it challenging for the citizens to track how public money is managed.

Of the eight countries surveyed in Central Asian region, Georgia’s OBI score of 55 is the second highest after Russia, but it has not changed from the country’s score in the previous OBI 2010 which was also 55.

Based on the main findings, Georgia is consistent in publishing only four of the eight key budget documents measured by the OBI: Pre-Budget Statement, Executive’s Budget Proposal, Enacted Budget, and Audit Report. At the same time, despite conducting generally strong oversight of planning and implementation of the national budget there is still a need to further strengthen the oversight powers of the Georgian Parliament and the Supreme Audit Office. Another major finding of the report is that Georgian citizens have limited opportunities to participate in the country’s budget formulation and execution processes.

Georgia’s OBI score over four surveys

How does Georgia compare to its neighbours in Central Asia?

In order to address these gaps and expand Georgia’s budget transparency and accountability, the Georgian authorities should undertake the following actions:

• Provide more comprehensive information in the Executive’s Budget Proposal on the composition of public debt, impact of different macroeconomic forecasts on the budget, also on the government’s quasi-fiscal activities, contingent and future liabilities, financial and non-financial assets, and tax expenditures;
• Clearly link program budget to the government’s stated policy goals and make it more measurable by adding non-financial data and clear performance indicators;
• Publish In-Year Reports, Mid-Year Review, Year-End Report and Citizens Budget, regularly and in a timely manner, and make these and other key budget documents equally available both online and in print copies;
• Publish reports on how the executive addressed audit recommendations;
• Expand the oversight role of the Parliament in defining the national budgetary priorities by giving it the power in law to amend the Executive’s Budget Proposal;
• Ensure that the Supreme Audit Office has full discretion to decide which audits of public institutions it wishes to undertake;
• Establish a strong legal framework and multiple mechanisms for active public participation in budgeting. Specifically, create easily accessible online and offline platforms for interested citizens to engage in budget consultations on a regular basis and provide systematic feedback to these citizens on how their input generated from the consultations influenced national budgeting priorities and their implementation. 

About the OBI:

The OBI is based on the Open Budget Survey (OBS) - the only independent, comparative, regular measure of budget transparency and accountability around the world. The OBS consists of 125 multiple-choice questions, of which 95 questions measure the availability, timeliness and comprehensiveness of the following eight key budget documents: Pre-Budget Statement, Executive’s Budget Proposal, Enacted Budget, Citizens Budget, In-Year Reports, Mid-Year Review, Year-End Report, and Audit Report. The average scores received on these 95 questions make up an overall OBI score for each surveyed country, which can range from 0 to 100. The remaining 30 questions measure the strength of oversight institutions and opportunities for public engagement in budgeting.

It took over 18 months between July 2011 and December 2012 to conduct research for OBS 2012 in all 100 countries surveyed and involved approximately 400 experts. In Georgia, the OBS was completed by Transparency International Georgia (TI Georgia).

The Open Budget Survey addresses a critical issue for citizens since it is widely believed that budget systems that are transparent, have rigorous oversight institutions and are open to public engagement can be the best way to manage public funds effectively and equitably. Therefore, TI Georgia recommends the Georgian government to raise the profile of these issues and improve its transparency and accountability standards while planning, implementing and reporting on the national budget.

The complete Open Budget Survey 2012, including detailed analysis, methodology, and recommendations, is available at: http://internationalbudget.org/what-we-do/open-budget-survey/  [1]