John Samuel
The Budget of a government is the reflection of the policy and political
priorities of those who control and manage a government machinery and apparatus
at a given time. Budgets do not operate in a political or economic vacuum.
Budget on the one hand reflects the dynamics of power within an economy and on
the other hand reflects the policy and political choices of those who control
and manage the government. Budget is not only a document that is indicative of
policy priorities but also a political document that indicates the power
dynamics within an economy. Hence, budget is a part and parcel of the economic
and political governance of a country.
Economic governance denotes a larger arena beyond the
conventional confines of government finance or public finance. Economic Governance is a process of managing
power dynamics within the larger economy of a society or country with institutional
arrangements, fiscal policies, laws, process and management of natural, social
and economic resources. The ongoing economic crisis and prolonged recessions in
the major economies in the world raise serious questions about the dynamics of
economic governance and who control the economic governance of a given country.
It is increasingly clear the ‘free-market’ economy is hardly ‘free’ and often controlled by the big
corporate interests in the finance market as well as in the larger markets of
goods and services. Hence, there is a new call to action for states and
governments to play an optimal role in the market to ensure more accountability
and transparency and also to decrease the inequality (economic, social and
political) within a given society. There is also a larger concern about the
link between sustainable environment and sustainable economies. The dogma of
economic growth even at the cost of environmental sustainability is
increasingly questioned within governments, market as well as civil society.
The world is also facing an unprecedented level of economic and social
inequality and these pose great challenges for the future of democracy itself.
Within a
democratic context,
budgets are expected to be formulated and passed through a consultative process
and through discussions in the legislature or parliament. The budget revenue is
directly or indirectly contributed by the people and in this sense budgets
actually belong to the tax payers. The sovereignty of a democratic state is
derived from the sovereignty of its people and the legitimacy of a government
is depended on the approval of the people who elect their representatives to
represent their interest and perspectives in the parliament and assembly. It is
in this context, accountability of the government to the people and
transparency of the whole process of governance become cardinal to the genuine
function of democratic governments. However, there is a significant gap between
the real normative and value framework of democracy and the actual functioning
of the governments. In spite of the principles of a representative democracy, governments
in practise are often run by an entrenched nexus of bureaucratic and political
elites in the government. In theory, a Cabinet selected among an elected
majority in a democratic process is the political executive. However, in
practise the government executive is largely run by bureaucratic elites with
support of government staff who more often command and control the process of
governance through control of information, process and delivery of services on
the ground. A government often operates and exerts power through ‘law’ (and
‘order’) and the money it controls through budgetary process. Though laws are
developed through legislative process, the real implementation is in the hands
of the government bureaucracy. And it is the same with the budgetary process.
Though the budget is expected to be discussed, debated and passed through a
legislative process, in reality the implementation and proposals of budgets are
in the hands of a government bureaucracy. While the Right to Information and a
vigilant fourth estate play an important role in lifting the ‘veil of secrecy’’
within the bureaucratic structures of governments, there is an increasing
concern about the effectiveness and efficiency of budget management and also
the entrenched corrupt nexus that drains the resources from the government as
well as people. It is in this context Budget Transparency and Accountability
become a very important means to truly democratize governments and the process
of governance.
Budget
Accountability and Economic Governance:
Political
Economy of Budgets
Accountability denotes the rights, responsibilities and
duties that exist between people and various institutions that affect their
lives. Accountability and legitimacy are two sides of the same coin. Lack of
accountability will result in lack of political legitimacy. Lack of legitimacy
will result in democratic deficit and the consequent abuse of power by decision
makers and power-holders. From the perspective of democratic governance, people
and citizens are the owners and the shapers of the State. The sovereignty of
the Sate is derived from the sovereignty of the citizenship. Hence, all institutions
of the state and governments are duty bound to be accountable to citizens.
However, power is no longer the monopoly of the state or governments.
Increasingly big transnational corporations, media, various public and private
institutions, political parties, civil society formations and NGOs wield power
and control resources and take actions and decision that affect the lives,
choices and livelihood of people. Hence there has to be broader understanding,
politics and ethics of accountability.
The big players in the markets like transnational corporations, big financial operators, including the banks and big media corporation increasingly tend to shape the boundaries of the state and lives and choices of the people. These unaccountable and powerful actors can become the biggest threat to Just and Democratic Governance in their quest for profit, unbridled free market, and accumulation of wealth and information.
The big players in the markets like transnational corporations, big financial operators, including the banks and big media corporation increasingly tend to shape the boundaries of the state and lives and choices of the people. These unaccountable and powerful actors can become the biggest threat to Just and Democratic Governance in their quest for profit, unbridled free market, and accumulation of wealth and information.
Democratic Accountability is both political and ethical.
Accountability also denotes legal, social, economic and managerial aspects.
Accountability is about answerability and enforceability. Answerability means
the right to get information and clear response from any institutions or
authority and the obligation of such institutions to provide information and
response to such stake-holders. Enforceability denotes the capacity to ensure
that a redressal is done or action is taken to correct a wrong action, wrong
policy. Empowerment of people in terms of information, knowledge and
mobilization is a prerequisite to demand any form of effective accountability.
Budget Accountability involves the responsibility of the
governments to answerable to the people/tax-payers about how their money is
spend and why the money is spend or what kind of difference did budget
priorities and implementation made on the ground or in the lives of people.
While most of the governments tend to stress the new promises and proposals in
the budgets, there is hardly any initiative that stress on the performance of
the budget. The very formulation of the
budget or budget proposals often ignore the long term or short term need of a
society, though there is no dearth in popular promises. The increasing gap
between the budget proposals and performance on the one hand and performance
and impact on the other hand raise questions about budget accountability. The increasing gap between the budget
estimates and revised estimates and the relative lack of transparency on how
such revisions take place also raise questions about budget integrity.
Though
there are some positive efforts in few states like Kerala to consults civil
society organisations, social movements, citizens groups and associations of
marginalised people during the formulation of the budget process, the general
tendency in India at the Union level and state level is to only consult the
rich and powerful such as FICCI, CII or other vested interest lobbies. Within the Indian context there is also an
increasing concern about the link between election and political party funding
by big corporate companies and consequent reduction of taxes in the business
areas that affect a particular corporate house. This nexus between big
corporate companies and bureaucratic and political elites with connivance of
media companies controlled by big business interest raise series issues of
budget integrity as well as democratic deficits. So while there is indeed a
tendency to have new proposals on social protections and popular budget
proposals, the question is who actually influence the underlying political
economy of a budget.
It is
in this context that Economic Governance of a country become crucial.
Economic Governance is a much broader concept that public finance. In democratic contexts, there is a need to
extent the accountability narrative to all institutional arenas within a given
society. Economic governance will have implications for how inflation is
managed, how prices of commodities and goods are managed, how natural and human
resources are managed. In a democratic context, democratisation of economy is
as important as the democratisation of politics. Governance is deeply political
as governance is also about the negotiation of power within and beyond
institutional arenas of state, market and civil society. One of the key
concerns in a democratic discourse is that while there is an increasing stress
for democratization of political governance, there is a tendency to leave the
economic governance to ‘market forces’ and here the ‘market forces’ often mean
the big Multinational corporations or big corporate houses that tend to
dominate the power dynamics and growth of economy. The big players in the stock
market, finance /currency markets and banking sector can often create semblance
of a ‘vibrant market’ creating
speculative practices and artificial growth.
No comments:
Post a Comment