This document discusses budget transparency in Egypt. It covers recent developments that increased transparency, such as a 2005 law amending the budget law and 2007 constitutional amendments. It also discusses actions taken by the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Planning to increase transparency through regular reports. The document assesses Egypt's transparency against IMF and OECD frameworks and looks at indicators for government effectiveness and voice and accountability over time. It discusses transparency for citizens and government and mechanisms to increase engagement, including freedom of information, capacity building, and the role of organizations like the CAO. The conclusion calls for completing reforms to increase performance-based budgeting, passing a freedom of information law, and improving the budget cycle and financial management.

1. Lobna M. AbdelLatif
FEPS, Cairo University
Lobna.abdellatif@feps.edu.eg

2. 
Recent Developments
Positioning & Assessing I
Positioning & Assessing II
Conclusion & Way Forward
Contents

3. 
Recent Developments
Budget Law: amending budget law no. 53 for the
year 1973 by law no. 87 of the year 2005
Constitution 1971: articles no. 115 and 116 in 2007
Actions: MoF , MoP

4. 
Budget Law: more transparency
(2005)
Budget presentation : functional
Budget structure: classification
Budget components: programs
Budget comprehensiveness: energy subsidy
Budget discipline: caps, conditions on amendments
Constitution : openings
(2007)
Discussion: more time, 3months
Right to amend: with hard budget constraint
Audit results: 6months after execution max.

5. 
Actions
(2007/08…)
Monthly: The MOF Monthly Financial Reports
Mid Year: The MoF’s Egyptian Economic Monitor
(Mid-Year Review)
End Year: Egypt’s Final Account (Year-End Report)
Yearly: Citizen Budget, First (only, partial) issue 2010
Actions
(in progress)
Presentation: Spatial, Chapter 6 (MoP)
Presentation: Programs, Chapter 6 (MoP)
Presentation: Central/Local, Decentralization (MoF&MoP)

6. 
Positioning& Assessing I
IMF, OECD
Transparency Framework

7. 
Positioning& Assessing I
Reference
 Systems of Responsibility
 Comprehensiveness of
Budget Presentation
 Fiscal Risks Disclosure
 Integrity and
accountability Assurance
 Publication of all budget
documentation and fiscal
information
Assessing
 Quasi Fiscal Activities
 Whole Government
Framework, pre budget
statement
 Financial management&
fiscal gimmicks
 Cash/accrual
 CAO role

8. 
Positioning& Assessing II
Transparency:
Why
Whom
How

9. 
 Informing citizens
Answerability
 Improve resource allocation
Responsiveness
 Holding the government accountable
Accountability
 Voicing the opinion of citizens
Democracy
Why Transparency

10. 
Government Effectiveness
Statistical Table: Government Effectiveness, Comparison across selected countries
Country Sources Year Percentile Rank
(0-100)
Governance Score
(-2.5 to +2.5)
Standard Error
EGYPT, ARAB REP.
10 2011 32.2 -0.60 0.18
10 2010 40.7 -0.43 0.18
10 2009 45.0 -0.34 0.18
10 2008 41.3 -0.44 0.18
10 2007 39.8 -0.45 0.18
10 2006 34.6 -0.55 0.17
8 2005 41.0 -0.39 0.17
8 2004 48.3 -0.23 0.17
7 2003 44.9 -0.30 0.17
7 2002 40.0 -0.40 0.17
6 2000 49.8 -0.16 0.19
6 1998 48.8 -0.17 0.19
4 1996 47.8 -0.21 0.24
90th-100th Percentile 50th-75th Percentile 10th-25th Percentile
75th-90th Percentile 25th-50th Percentile 0th-10th Percentile
Source : Kaufmann D., A. Kraay, and M. Mastruzzi
(2010), The Worldwide Governance Indicators:
Methodology and Analytical Issues ,

11. 
Voice and Accountability
Country Sources Year Percentile Rank
(0-100)
Governance Score
(-2.5 to +2.5)
Standard Error
EGYPT, ARAB REP.
15 2011 16.0 -1.13 0.11
16 2010 13.7 -1.18 0.11
16 2009 14.2 -1.16 0.11
15 2008 13.9 -1.21 0.11
15 2007 15.4 -1.16 0.11
15 2006 14.4 -1.20 0.11
13 2005 22.1 -0.95 0.14
12 2004 21.2 -0.95 0.14
9 2003 19.2 -1.08 0.16
9 2002 18.8 -1.08 0.16
7 2000 24.5 -0.79 0.21
5 1998 24.0 -0.82 0.23
5 1996 24.0 -0.76 0.22
90th-100th Percentile 50th-75th Percentile 10th-25th Percentile
75th-90th Percentile 25th-50th Percentile 0th-10th Percentile
Source : Kaufmann D., A. Kraay, and M. Mastruzzi
(2010), The Worldwide Governance Indicators:
Methodology and Analytical Issues ,

12. Egypt 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Total Outlays
32.1 29.2 34.5 36.1 30.3
General Public Services 7.8 7.3 8.8 8.5 8.7
Defence 2.8 2.6 2.5 2.3 2.0
Public Order and Safety 1.8 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.5
Economic Affairs 2.0 2.0 2.3 2.4 2.2
Environmental Protection 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Housing and Community Amenities 1.0 1.3 1.7 1.9 1.7
Health 1.7 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.4
Recreation, Culture, and Religion 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.2
Education 4.5 4.0 4.1 4.1 3.7
Social Protection
Source: (IMF, GFS)
9.8 7.9 10.5 12.1 7.8
Outlays by Function
%GDP

13. 
Transparency For Whom
Fiscal Stance
Facilitate
Government
work
Supply Side
Democracy
Facilitate
citizen
engagement
Demand Side

14. 
How: Mechanism for engagement
 Creating a substance for dialogue
 Data vs. information
 Line items vs. programs
 MTF
 Creating an opening for dialogue
 Widening the room for dialogue
 Empowering legally the dialogue
Transparency
(content)
Budget cycle
(way)

15. 
How: Mechanism for engagement…..
 Support system:
 Information
 Freedom of information
 Culture of archiving/ requesting/ using information
 Capacity to communicate with information
 CAO role to assess the quality of public spending
 CSOs: economic&social rights, community
development

16. 
Conclusion &Way Forward
Transparency works for Democracy
Complete reform agenda
Performance based budgeting
Freedom of Information law
NGOs Law
Budget cycle
Financial management
CAO

17. 
Thank You