Budgets of 17 cities of Ukraine: the first results of the 1st Ukrainian Index of Transparency, Participation and Integrity

On December 28 in Kiev the first intermediate results of the 1st UkrainianIndex of transparency, participation and integrity (PUD index) on the basis of an analysis of the situation with the publication and approval of local budgets in 17 cities of Ukraine.Monitoring was based onMethodology of the Pud Index, which was developed by the Open Society Foundation. The project is being implementedOdessa organization of the Committee of Voters of Ukraine and the Open Society Foundation together with partners in 15 cities within the framework of the public partnership “For transparent local budgets!”. The local partner is the Polissya Fund of International and Regional Research.

As part of the eventAnatoliy Boyko, chairman of the Odessa Odessa Organizationnoted the importance of this initiative to increase the transparency, participation and integrity of local authorities in budgetary policy. Among the cities that were monitored and evaluated by the budget process, are regional centers (Kyiv, Odesa, Dnipropetrovsk, Lviv, Mykolaiv, Chernihiv, Cherkasy, Chernivtsi, Sumy, Ivano-Frankivsk, Severodonetsk), and the cities and settlements, where the city was able (Voznesensk, Izmail, Kovel, Chuguev, Zdolbunov, Belozerka).

Presenting the results of the study, the Director of the Open Society Foundation and the authorHe noted that these are intermediate results that allow to fix and see only part of the painting for the publication and approval of local budgets as of December 25, 2015. The final results of the index are planned to be presented in January 2016 after the adoption of all local budgets and clarification of open issues.

Ivan Sikora drew attention to the fact that, despite the independence of the adoption of local budgets from the state and a clear term in Art. 77 of the Budget Code, as of December 25, only 12 of the 17 local budgets were adopted.Including, the budget of the city of Chernihiv was accepted only on December 28.

Despite the clear requirement of the current legislation, which qualifies the decision on the budget, as a normative legal act, and the extension of the rules on publishing 20 working days before the date of consideration for the purpose of adoption, this norm was maintained only 5 cities (Odesa, Zdolbunov, Voznesensk, Chugui).In Kiev, Chernivtsi, Sumy, Kovel, Severodonetsk and Izmail, they published a draft decision in less than 20, but more than 10 working days.And in 4 cities (Lviv, Cherkasy, Chernihiv, Ivano-Frankivsk) the draft decision was published in less than 10 working days.At the time of the presentations, no budget projects were published in Dnipropetrovsk and Nikolaev.

The study was also evaluatedCompleteness of the draft budget decision. The analysis of all the published local budgets showed the existence of issues to comply with the requirements of Article 76 of the Budget Code. In 15 budgets analyzed the absence of one or more documents from the list below:

explanatory note;
explanation of the main spending units to the draft relevant budget (the budget commissions of the respective local council are submitted);
local budget forecast for the next two budget periods, prepared according to Article 21 of the Budget CodeUkraine;
a list of investment programs (projects) for the planned budget period and the next two budget periods;
Information on the progress of the relevant budget in the current budget period.

Citizens still face obstacles to receiving information from official sites onPersonal votes of deputies for the budget. Only in 4 cities (Kyiv, Odesa, Lviv and Chernivtsi) information aboutPersonal votingAvailable on the site. Another 3 (Voznesensk, Kovel and Izmail) information can be obtained on request. In other cities, personal voting has not been introduced or there are difficulties in obtaining information on this issue.Despite the existing practice of publishing such information on the site of the Chernihiv City Council, the local authorities received the lowest score. The reason for this was the failure to comply with the deadline for approval of the city’s main financial document at a session of the city council.

Even worse is the situation withstenograms of session meetingsOnly in Kiev are being conducted and published. In Voznesensk they can be obtained on request. In all other cities, session sessions are absent on sites, not available on request or are not conducted at all.This indicator of Chernihiv also received the lowest score, since the presentation of the results of this study preceded the budget session and did not meet the requirements of the legislation.

A little better is a accessibility situationdeputy requestsrelated to the local budget. This MP tool is an important indicator of assessing the quality of his work and response to the needs and interests of voters. Only in Odessa and Lviv on the site are available deputy requests. The question of as far as they concern local budgets for 2016 is at the stage of verification. In Chernivtsi and Izmail, they are available on request. In other cities, they are not only not on the site, but they cannot be obtained on request.In this context, it was also impossible to evaluate the activities of local authorities, since the budget process was assessed by December 25.

Practice of participation of citizens in meetings of the budget commission and session of the councilAlong with the analysis of transcripts, deputies’ requests and appeals, votes, is an indicator that certifies the existence of interest in citizens of direct participation in the decision -making process, control of deputies and readiness to monitor how the proposals provided by citizens are considered.Practice of participation of citizens in meetings of the budget commissionIt is only widespread in 6 cities (Kyiv, Sumy, Cherkasy, Ivano-Frankivsk, Chuguev, Bilozer).In 2 cities (Voznesensk, Kovel) Information about such practice was absent but was able to get information on a request.In Chernihiv, the information about the meetings of the budget commission was recorded in local media only on the day of its holding, but access to the West was not limited.In 7 cities (Odesa, Lviv, Dnipropetrovsk, Mykolaiv, Zdolbuniv, Severodonetsk, Izmail, Chernivtsi) there is no practice of such participation or information was not obtained as of December 25, 12.15. Similar is the situation with practiceparticipation of citizens in the sessionThe local council, which considered the issue of local budget adoption. The practice of participation of citizens in the session of the Council is widespread in 7 cities (Chernivtsi, Sumy, Kovel, Ivano-Frankivsk, Chuguev, Izmail, Belozer), partly in Voznesensk.For 9 cities (Odesa, Kyiv, Lviv, Dnipropetrovsk, Mykolaiv, Cherkasy, Chernihiv, Zdolbuniv, Severodonetsk)Characteristic or lack of practice of such participation or information could not be obtained as of 25.12.15.

Consulting with citizens on the draft budget decisionAfter its publication, it is an important practice of involving citizens in the preparation of the main financial document.

Electronic consultationsOnly 6 cities were held (Kyiv, Chernivtsi, Sumy, Voznesensk, Kovel, Severodonetsk). Electronic consultations in 11 cities (Odesa, Lviv, Cherkasy, Chernihiv, Zdolbuniv, Ivano-Frankivsk, Chuguev, Izmail, Belozer, Dnipropetrovsk, Mykolaiv) were not carried out.

Public public discussion(Open Meeting of the Budget Commission) was held in 9 cities (Kyiv, Odesa, Chernivtsi, Cherkasy, Sumy, Voznesensk, Kovel, Severodonetsk, Chuguev). Public public discussions were not conducted in 8 cities (Lviv, Dnipropetrovsk, Mykolaiv, Chernihiv, Zdolbuniv, Ivano-Frankivsk, Izmail, Belozerka).

Public expert discussionwas held only in 3 cities (Chernivtsi, Cherkasy, Kovel).meetings with interested parties,which represent local initiatives and/or business associations.

Analyzing some of the dataChernihiv, we see that at almost all the studied points our city occupies the latest positions. This is a good incentive for the new government to improve the situation with publicity and transparency of the budget process.

Following the adoption of all local budgets and receiving answers to public information, data will be clarified about each of the 17 cities, which are the subject of monitoring and evaluation within the transparency, participation and integrity index, which is used by the organizations of public partnership “for transparent local budgets”.