Skip to main content

Comparative Budget Process in Westminster Parliaments: A Lesson for Effective Fiscal Oversight

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 158 Accesses

Abstract

A parliament holds the constitutional power of the purse. As the guardian of the public purse, parliaments have the right to oversee the budget process in its totality. Parliament must ensure that the revenue and spending measures it authorizes in the budget are fiscally sound, match the needs of the population with the available resources, and are implemented properly and efficiently. Legislatures in both developed and developing countries are seeking to strengthen their role in the budget process. Parliament is responsible for monitoring how the government raises money, how much and on what it spends that money, and what consequences that brings forth to the economy of the country. In this context, parliament must exercise oversight before the money is appropriated (ex-ante control) and monitor public expenditure after money has been spent by the executive agencies (ex-post control). A merely token involvement in the budget process relegates the legislative power of the purse to the realm of constitutional fiction. Is it possible for parliaments in the Westminster system to exercise continuous oversight throughout the entire budget process? It was once common wisdom in systems derived from the Westminster model that budget-making was an executive function and parliament had to simply approve it, with or without amendment. In the early decades of the twenty-first century, however, this conception has widely changed. Some parliaments exercise significant oversight throughout the process, while others exercise minimal oversight. This chapter analyzes the budget-making process of a few developed Westminster democracies and compares it to the case of Bangladesh. The findings suggest that the budget process in Bangladesh is less open and ex ante, and that Parliament has little scope to be involved in it. Ex-post oversight is also limited by systemic constraints. Changes in the ROP could make a substantive improvement in the budget process and create room for exercising effective fiscal oversight on the public purse.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   159.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   159.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The UK does not have a codified or written constitution as such, but rather is formed of Acts of Parliament, court judgments, and conventions.

  2. 2.

    Between 1973 and 2006, the Public Accounts Committee published only thirteen reports. During the same period, the equivalent committee in the UK and Canada published on average ten to twenty reports each year and in India, more than ten each year (See Woodly B, Saghal B and Stapenhurst F (eds) Scrutinizing Public expenditure: Role of Public accounts Committee, pp. 12–18. In Bangladesh, there were only four and five reports in total published in the tenures of the Fifth and Seventh Parliaments respectively (Ahmed 2000: 9).

References

  • Ahmed, N. (2000) Parliament and Public Spending in Bangladesh: Limits of Control. Bangladesh Institute of Parliamentary Studies, Dhaka

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmed, N (2002) The Bangladesh Parliament, Ashgate: Anthony Rowe Limited, Chippenham, Wiltshire London

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmed, N. (2006) Limits of Parliamentary Control: Public Spending in Bangladesh, UPL, Dhaka

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmed, N. and Obaidullah, ATM. (2007) (eds.) The Working of Parliamentary Committees in Westminster System, University Press Limited, Dhaka

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, Richard and Daniel Tommasi (eds) (2001) Managing Public Expenditure: A Reference Book for Transition Countries, OECD, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, B. “The Value of a Nonpartisan, Independent, Objective Analytic Unit to the Legislative Role in the Budget Preparation”, IMF, XVII Regional Seminar on Fiscal Policy. The Role of Parliament in the Fiscal Policy Formulation, January, 25, 2005, pp. 39–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Anura Priyadharshana Yapa, “Parliament and the budgetary process from a Gender Perspective”, Regional Seminar (Colombo, 2003), pp. 26–28 (IPU: 2002 http://www.ipu.org/splz-e/manila02/report-e.pdf)

  • Azad, A.K (2007) Towards Good Governance in Public Sector of Bangladesh: The Role of Public Accounts Committee and Office of the Auditor and Comptroller General, Dissertation for the Masters of Economics, Graduate School of Economics, Faculty of Economics, Yamaguchi University, Yamaguchi, Japan

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachrach, E. Bangladesh Parliament Secretariat Budget Analysis and Monitoring Unit (BAMU) Needs Assessment and Recommendations Report, April, 2008

    Google Scholar 

  • Bangladesh Parliament: Rules of Procedure See Rules 246 and 247

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn, R. & Kennon, A. (2003) Parliament Functions, Practice and Procedures, Thomson, Sweet & Maxwell

    Google Scholar 

  • Brazier & Ram, V. (2006) The Fiscal Maze: Parliament, Government and Public Money, Hansard Society, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Budget Process New Zealand Government The Treasury. http://www.treasury.govt.nz/budget/process

  • Canadian federal budget. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_federal_budget

  • Carlos Santiso (2004) Legislatures and Budget Oversight in Latin America: Strengthening Public Finance Accountability in Emerging Economies, OECD Journal on Budgeting, Vol. 4, No. 2 © OECD 2004

    Google Scholar 

  • Chowdhury, R. R. (2006) Riazur Rahman Chowdhury, Manual on Public Accounts Committee, PAC and Comptroller and Auditor- General (C&AG) Operational Relationship, UNDP, Dhaka

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel Blais and Fred Schenkelaars (2010) Institutional Risk Assessment Best Practices Compendium (anti-Corruption and Integrity Auditing (A private Publication)

    Google Scholar 

  • David McGee (2002) Scrutinizing Public Expenditures: Assessing the Performance of Public Accounts Committees. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/8244 World Bank. http://openknowledge.worldbank.or/handle/10986/8244 License 2.0IGO

  • Dean, P. Government Budgeting in Developing Countries (London, Routledge, 1989)

    Google Scholar 

  • East, P. (2003a) “The Budget: Purpose, Composition and Terminology”, Regional Seminar on the National Budget, Regional Seminar on the National Budget, (www.ipu.org/conf-e/104.pdf. Colombo, 2003)

  • East, P. (2003b) “The Respective Roles of Government and Parliamentary Process”, Regional Seminar 26-28, (Colombo, 2003 https://www.iom.int/jahia/webdav/shared/.../colombo/colombo_report_2003.pd)

  • Emy, H. (1975) The Politics of Australian Democracy, Macmillan, Melbourne.

    Google Scholar 

  • GOB: Constitution of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh

    Google Scholar 

  • House of Commons Treasury Committee (2007) “The 2006 Pre-Budget Report: Government Response to the Committee’s Second Report of Session 2006–2007”. HC 423, p. 14

    Google Scholar 

  • Islam, S. M. (2005) Public Accounts Committee: Its Role in Bangladesh: A Dissertation by BU ID NO. 07272005 MA in Governance & Development Course. BRAC University, Dhaka

    Google Scholar 

  • Islam, Shahidul (2010) Public Accounts Committee: Its Role in Bangladesh. A Dissertation for the Degree of M. A. in Governance and Development, Institute of Governance Studies BRAC University, Dhaka

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, N. (1966) Parliament and Administration: The Estimates committee 1945–65, George Allen and Urwin, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan A. A. (2008) People’s Participarion in Budgetary Process: In Search of Some Policy Reforms, Unnayan Shamunnay, 2008, p. 25

    Google Scholar 

  • Krafchic, W. and Wehner, J. (2004) Legislatures and Budget Oversight, Presented at the open forum held in Kazakhstan, Revenue Watch in Almaty (April 8, 2004)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell O‘Brien, Legislative Audit, Public Accounts Committee and PBOS? (https://www.oecd.org/gov/budgeting/49788465.pdf

  • MOF (2008). Stands for Ministry of Finance, Government of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh (GPRB)

    Google Scholar 

  • Open budget index 2008. www.openbudgetindex.org

  • Pre-Budget Report (2003) Presented to Parliament by the Chancellor of the Exchequer by Command of Her Majesty. www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/D/1/PBR03completerep[1].pdf

  • Parliament and the budgetary process, including from a gender perspective

    Google Scholar 

  • Policy Dialogue on Legislative Development, Brussels, 2002, PP2022 see in www.undp.org/governance/eventsite/policy

  • Rahman, T. (2008) Parliamentary Control and Government Accountability in South Asia, Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Regional seminar for ASEAN+3 Parliaments Manila (Philippines) 23-July 2002. http://www.ipu.org/splz-e/manila02/report-e.pdf

  • Santiso, C. “Legislative and Budget Oversight in Latin America: Strengthening Public Financial Accountability in Latin America”, OECD Jo

    Google Scholar 

  • Shamunnay (2002) The Budget Making Process, A Study Commissioned by IDPAA, PROSHIKA and conducted by, UNIversity Press Limited

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. Administrative Behaviour (New York, 1957).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stapenhurst, R. (2003) “Accountability and Transparency in the Budgetary Process: Parliamentary Oversight of the Budget: Reading, Analyzing and Questioning Parliamentary Tools and Mechanism”, Regional Seminar, Colombo. www.ipu.org/PDF/publications/colombo_en.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Stapenhurst, Rick, Sahgal, Vinod, Woodley, William, and Pelizzo Ricardo (2005) “Scrutinizing Public Expenditure: Assessing the Performance of Public Accounts Committee” WB Policy Research Working Paper, 3613. WO Washington D.C. World Bank. http://openknowledge.worldbank.or/handle/10986/8244 License 2.0IGO

  • Staskiewicz, W. (2002) Budget Analysis for Parliaments: The Case of Poland, Bureau of Research, Chancellery of the Sejm Warsaw, Polland) 68th IFLA Council and General Conference August 18-24, 2002 https://www.oecd.org/gov/budgeting/43411793.pdf

  • The Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh (Dhaka, Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  • The Ministry of Finance (2008) Budget Call Circular. GOB

    Google Scholar 

  • UNDP: Chowdhury, N. (1997) Sangsad Unnayan Prokalpa (BGD/96/ 017, Implementation Plan of on Strengthening of the Parliament, Dhaka

    Google Scholar 

  • UNDP: David Butcher (2004) Mission Report, November, Dhaka

    Google Scholar 

  • USAID (2011) Bangladesh: Promoting Governance, Accountability and Transparency (PROGATI) Assessing Parliament Capacity to Conduct Public Expenditure Oversight, DAI/Asia Foundation: Dhaka

    Google Scholar 

  • Wehner, J. (2003) General Introduction to the Budgetary Process, Reviewing the Variety of National Approaches, Regional Seminar on the National Budge, (www.ipu.org/PDF/publications/colombo_en.pdfGColombo, 2003)

  • Wieslaw Staskiewicz (2002) Budget Analysis for Parliaments: The Case of Poland, Bureau of Research, Chancellery of the Sejm Warsaw, Polland) 68th IFLA Council and General Conference August 18–24, 2002. https://www.oecd.org/gov/budgeting/43411793.pdf

  • Wildavasky (1964) An Incrementalist View of Budget outcomes. https://books.google.com/books?isbn=1416577629

  • IPU (2002) http://www.ipu.org/splz-e/manila02/report-e.pdf

  • Constitutional Mandate Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General. www.cagbd.org

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Obaidullah, A.T.M. (2019). Comparative Budget Process in Westminster Parliaments: A Lesson for Effective Fiscal Oversight. In: Institutionalization of the Parliament in Bangladesh. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5317-7_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics