By Jamal Msami :
The overriding objective of local government reforms in Tanzania has
been to improve the quality of and access to public services provided
by local governments. Increasingly, this has translated into local
government authorities (LGAs) being tasked with providing and
overseeing the delivery of essential services in key sectors, notably
education, health, water and roads, as well as being entrusted with
large sums of money to fulfill these commitments. The need for LGAs
to share timely and accurate information with the general public has
intensified since the implementation of reforms began. Indeed,
transparency is a recognized constitutional and statutory rights under
Article 132(5) sub section (f) of the Tanzania constitution (which
declares transparency as a basic tenet of ethics for public leadership
), and Section 49 of the 1982 local government finances act which
places the burden of sharing information on local finances firmly on
local government authorities.
REPOA conducted public opinion surveys in 2003, 2006 and 2009,
covering 1,260 individuals in six local authorities – two urban (Ilala
and Mwanza) and four rural( Bagamoyo, Iringa, Kilosa, Moshi) to assess
the reception and status of demand on key aspects reforms from
governance to finances and financial management. This article is based
on a policy briefing prepared by Jamal Msami, a researcher at REPOA,
analyzing findings to determine citizens’ perceptions on the
transparency of financial information provided by LGAs.
Good governance relies on three interdependent characteristics –
transparency, accountability and integrity. These three traits
underline the importance and need for timely and accurate information,
which, recursively, requires a willingness to share information, i.e.
openness or transparency. The essence of reinstating local
governments, the reform agenda, and indeed the policy of
decentralisation by devolution (D by D) and the subsequent
Opportunities and Obstacles to Development (O&OD) planning approach,
is to move governments closer to the people. This implies an increased
involvement of the masses in local planning, budgeting and oversight.
This requires a sharing of information between citizens and their
local authorities.
Citizens’ involvement in participatory planning in the six councils
remains limited; only 20, 35, and 30 percent of respondents in the
2003, 2006 and 2009 surveys, respectively, reported participating in
the preparation of their village or wards annual and mid-term plans,
posing a threat of a disconnect between what citizens want and/or need
and what they get from their local authorities. Unfortunately, this
has been a recurring theme in local planning which has gone unchecked
even with official recognition of modus operandi stretching as far
back as the 2006 Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability
Review.
LGA revenue, expenditure and intergovernmental transfers have
increased significantly both in nominal and absolute terms over the
last five years as reforms in local governance have gained momentum.
This has placed added responsibility for improved financial management
on LGAs to communicate with their subjects on budgetary matters to
ensure that citizens rest with ease as far as how their money is
spent. Data from the case councils indicate a steady increase in the
proportion of citizens receiving information on LGA budgets over
public radio and television broadcasts, in newspaper columns and on
notice boards at administrative centres, but over three-quarters of
citizens in the six case councils still reported no access to
information on local budgets.
The proportion of respondents who reported receiving information on
taxes and fees collected locally steadily increased from 6 percent in
2003 to 18 percent in 2009. This still means that 82 percent of
citizens are still not receiving information on the taxes and fees
they pay. Survey findings indicate that the proportion of citizens
receiving information on key sectoral allocations at the local level
steadily increased; 15 percent of all respondents reported receiving
such information in 2009 compared to 4 percent in 2003 and 8 percent
in 2006.
Periodic audits of local government finances and projects are
essential to build taxpayers’ trust and confidence in governance for
taxpayers to clearly see how and where taxes they paid yield dividend
within their localities. Poor management , accountability and
unsatisfactory documentation of work have consistently dogged the
functioning of local authorities in Tanzania with the Controller and
Auditor General and the parliamentary Local Authorities’ Account
Committee (LAAC) both being unimpressed by the degree of laxity and
general waste of resources in various local authorities. To put
things in context, the CAG’s local governments audit report for the
financial year 2008/09 observed that there were noticeable delays in
the completion of project works in 33 local authorities with a total
budget of TShs 2,760,364,847. It is the responsibility of local
authorities to publish results of their audited accounts despite the
best effort s of the National Audit Office to do so.
Although a one hundred percent improvement every three years in the
proportions of respondents receiving information on LGAs’ audited
accounts was recorded (from 3 percent in 2003 to 6 percent in 2003 and
then 12 percent in 2009), an overwhelming majority (88%) did not
receive this information in 2009.
The thirst for more dialogue and information between local authorities
and their constituents still hasn’t been quenched. The vast majority
of citizens still clamour for more information to be divulged by local
authorities. Survey findings further indicate a growing awareness
among Tanzanians of local governments’ responsibility to provide
fiscal information and their right to access this information.
However, to date much of the awareness has not translated into
effective public demand for information from a mere register of desire
within a framework of explicit public accountability. With citizens
becoming more aware of the responsibilities of administrative
structures, the days of behind-the-door planning, budgeting and
execution of projects are gone.
In spite of recorded marginal improvements in financial transparency,
an information vacuum still exists between local authorities and their
subjects that require to be filled. Opinion surveys have revealed
modest increases in the extent to which LGAs share information but
they have also highlighted the huge proportions not informed of
various aspects of local government activities and finances. This
poses a problem when matters related to accountability, ownership,
management and governance enter the equation. The premise behind
unveiling key financial information should be to promote an informed
consultative relationship between citizens and their local
governments.
The local in local governments has to stand out and distinguish them
from the central authority which is most of the times seen as distant,
unaware of local concerns and rigid for flexible and timely responses
to local needs. It can be argued that extensive and timely
dissemination of information (i.e more openness) on the part of local
authorities may even turn out to be more beneficial to them especially
in times of crises as it will show a proactive approach in identifying
(whether self or with the aid of their subjects) problems as well as
seeking local consensual solutions to them
*THE END *