|
Subject: Comment on Prime Minister’s Statement on recent allegations
of corruption against the Ministry of Finance
Comment on Prime Minister's Statement to the Press on recent
allegations of corruption against the Ministry of Finance 12 May 2009
Richard Curtain
Public Policy Consultant
richard@curtain-consulting.net.au
16 May 2009
The Prime Minister's explanation of the large salaries paid to
international advisers in the Ministry of Finance is most revealing about
how donor-funded technical assistance works or more accurately does not
work. The issue is not corruption but a failure to design the program so
that it delivers the results the Government of Timor-Leste wants.
Major failure in program design
The PM's statement explains in some detail the circumstances but in the
end fails to justify in terms of good practice why such high contract fees
are paid. The information in the PM's statement from the full independent
review of the Ministry of Finance by the international firm of accountants
Deloittes, a report not publicly available as far as I can tell, shows
major failures up to 2007 in what the international advisers were asked to
do. The lesson the Government should have drawn in designing a new
capacity building program was to restructure it so that fees are paid for
results.
The contract fees paid to international advisers are excessive because
those paying their fees have demanded so little in return. Current
arrangements encourage low performance because advisers have a strong
interest in making themselves indispensable so their working days are
extended.
It is normal practice to pay consultants large fees but this is
justified on the basis that the consultant delivers specified outcomes,
not just inputs. Consultants with good reputations operate by identifying
the problem, offering a solution and agree to be paid when they deliver
that solution.
Pay for results
The system of payment for international advisers needs to change from
paying people as individuals in the form of employment contracts. Payment
should be for one fee-for-service contract to the agency, in this case the
World Bank, for managing the project. The service contract should about
the delivery of results such as a functioning procurement system,
operating to international standards. Payments should be made when
specified performance targets are met.
This is the form of contract that these same advisers propose for the
delivery of complex services in Timor-Leste such as the national
connectivity network. If this type of contract is good enough for the
Government to require of other sophisticated service providers in Timor-Leste,
it is good enough for its own advisers in the Ministry of Finance.
Donors need to focus on outcomes
The debate over donor-funded payments to international advisers shows
the need for an different approach to how aid works in Timor-Leste. An
alternative can be called 'payment for delivery'. This approach proposes
that donors pay for each additional improvement made by the aid recipient
to achieving an agreed goal. This can apply, for example, to donor funding
for increased numbers of children going to and staying in school, or
increased access of the rural population to health clinics. Better still,
donors could pay for achieved outcomes such as better literacy at each
level of schooling, or reduced deaths from childbirth or malaria.
The current way donors operate is to insist on a narrow form of
accountability. To minimise the chances for corruption, donors impose an
excessive set of controls at each step of the aid delivery process. What
is missing is any donor responsibility for the final outcome, as
demonstrated by the quote from Deloitte's independent review of the Public
Finance Management Capacity Building Program.
Need to make evaluation results public
The other conclusion for the delivery of aid I draw from the Prime
Minister's statement is the importance of making public all evaluations of
aid programs, regardless of their results. This enables lessons to be
learned from the successes and the failures. Donors should be required to
conduct an impact evaluation of each program they fund. The Government
should also ask them to put the details of each program's proposed
evaluation on a public database, stating when it will be completed and
giving a date for the public release of the results. Donors cannot expect
the Government of Timor-Leste to be transparent and accountable if they
also do not act in the same way.
Back to May Menu
April
World Leaders Contact List
Main Postings Menu
|