1 / 26

Workshop on the Treasury Guidelines

Workshop on the Treasury Guidelines. KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Treasury. 07 June 2018. Presentation Outline. Introduction Focus of 2019/20 MTEF policy priorities The budget process Reprioritisation Format of 2019/20 MTEF budget submissions. Introduction (1).

whung
Download Presentation

Workshop on the Treasury Guidelines

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Workshop on the Treasury Guidelines KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Treasury 07 June 2018

  2. Presentation Outline • Introduction • Focus of 2019/20 MTEF policy priorities • The budget process • Reprioritisation • Format of 2019/20 MTEF budget submissions

  3. Introduction (1) The central fiscal objectives over the MTEF are to stabilise the growth of debt as a share of GDP and to strictly adhere to the planned expenditure ceiling KZN has suffered substantial budget cuts to a tune of R12bn from 13/14 MTEF. Some of these cuts related to the annual data update of the ES formula, while others related to NT’s fiscal consolidation plan. In 18/19 MTEF a total of R476m, R542m and R879m was cut from KZN’s baseline The Provincial Executive Council held an urgent Finance Lekgotla on 7 February 2018 to decide how the 2018/19 MTEF budget cuts should be effected, while trying not to compromise the province’s priority spending areas, as well as protecting the delivery of frontline services It was determined that the ES budget cuts would be effected proportionately against all Votes in 18/19, while the 19/20 and 20/21 budget cuts were offset by the Contingency Reserve exceeding R650m in those two years

  4. Introduction (2) There were also fiscal consolidation cuts effected against the province’s conditional grant allocation On the other hand, NT added some funds to the provincial baseline for Social Development over the 18/19 MTEF as a result of the impact of the NAWONGO Court Case judgment in the Free State. Also, additional funds were allocated over the MTEF toward the prevention and early intervention programmes to fight violence against women and children. NT also provided R2.031bn in 2020/21 for the carry-through costs of the wage agreement and this was used partially to offset the budget cut in the outer year, while the balance was allocated proportionately to all Votes For the 19/20 MTEF, the fiscal consolidation programme continues and cost-cutting measures will continue to cushion the impact of the budget cuts Implications of COE increment and the crowding out of service delivery

  5. Focus of 2019/20 MTEF policy priorities (1) Alignment between the NDP and the PGDS/P • The NDP focuses on a more capable state in partnership with stakeholders, and the goal is to treble the size of the economy by 2030 • The NDP has been provincialised in KZN through thePGDS/P, and thus the planning frameworks of national and provincial govt are fully aligned • As such, the PGDS/P provides KZN with a strategic framework to grow the economy for the development and improvement of the quality of life of all people living in the province • It is in this regard that the KZN Provincial Executive Council adopted the PEMP for KZN in 2014. The KZN PEMP was developed through the Operation Phakisa Model and the Laboratories (Lab) process and has also been fully aligned with the NDP and the PGDP

  6. Focus of 2019/20 MTEF policy priorities (2) Alignment between the NDP and the PGDS/P • The PEMP then identifies five pillars on which the drive to eradicate poverty in KZN is to be based. These pillars are: • Social security and housing • Agriculture • Enterprise development • Employment creation • Skills development

  7. Focus of 2019/21 MTEF policy priorities (3) Alignment of strategic priorities with the budget • Depts and public entities are required to prepare the 19/20 MTEF budget in line with their APPs (three-year plan), and they need to take note of both national and provincial outcomes and incorporate these into their plans. This includes the 14 national outcomes, and the nine point plan as set out by the President in his SONA in February 2014 • In 19/20, the APP must be formally tabled in the Provincial Legislature 10 days before the tabling of each department’s budget (in line with Treasury Regulation 5.2.2) and the final document must be submitted to OTP by 30 April 2019 • It is important for budget plans to link to strategic plans to ensure that the key objectives and priorities are budgeted for. This will be further elaborated on by OTP in a separate session with depts (date to be communicated) • Depts must ensure that, where applicable, sectorally defined service delivery information is used, and these must be included in their draft EPRE input • It is emphasised that the service delivery information/ motivation provided by depts in their budget submissions, as well as evidence of cost-cutting, will play a major role in the evaluation and final assessment of the proposed once-off initiatives

  8. Focus of 2019/20 MTEF policy priorities (4) Alignment of the APPs to budgets • Depts’ strategic plans should take into consideration priorities set out by the President in the 2014 SONA which were re-iterated in 2017 SONA. In addition, 2015 SONA provides the following nine point plan: • Resolving the energy challenge • Revitalising agriculture and the agro-processing value chain • Advancing beneficiation or adding value to our mineral wealth • More effective implementation of a higher impact Industrial Policy Action Plan • Scaling up private sector investment • Stabilising the labour market • Unlocking the potential of small, medium, and micro enterprises, co-operatives, township and rural enterprise • State reform and boosting the role of state owned companies, information and communications technology (ICT) infrastructure, water, sanitation and transport infrastructure • Operation Phakisa aimed at growing the ocean economy and other sectors

  9. Focus of 2019/20 MTEF policy priorities (5) Budgeting for service delivery • Increasingly, planned performance indicators will be used as the basis for budget allocation decisions, monitoring service delivery, and performance reporting on a quarterly and annual basis • Deptsmust therefore ensure that, where applicable, sectorally defined service delivery information is used in determining their budgets and these must be included in the first and second drafts EPRE inputs. In cases where deptsare not following sectoral measures, then a letter requesting deviation must be forwarded to OTP (and copied to PT) for annual submission to DPME • It is important that departmental budget and strategic planning teams do not work in isolation from one another. This is of particular importance in compiling Sections 2 and 3 of the EPRE (the Review and Outlook) • It is emphasised here that the service delivery information provided by departments to motivate for their once-off initiatives in their budget submissions, as well as evidence of cost-cutting, will play a major role in the evaluation and final assessment of the proposed once-off initiatives. Proposed initiatives are discussed in more detail in Chapter 6 of the TG doc

  10. The budget process (1) The MTEF details three-year rolling expenditure and revenue plans for provincial depts and public entities. The budget process allows govt to: • Prepare the 19/20 expenditure estimates in the context of enhancing service delivery and ensuring value for money • Strengthen and evaluate the alignment between medium and long-term plans • Revise its policy priorities, macro-economic framework and resource envelope • Evaluate departmental plans in line with national outcomes, provincial priorities and the objectives of the PGDP/PEMP • Focus on fiscal prudence by way of cost-cutting, ensuring enhanced service delivery, as well as value for money

  11. 2017/18 end of year evaluations with commitment register • U-AMP submissions APRIL • Prepare SPs/APPs • Issue Treasury Guidelines • Start on budget submissions MAY Q 1 JUNE • 1st draft SPs/APPs • Submit budget submissions • Submit NT’s budget database • Annual Reports • MTEC Hearings JULY • IPMP & Construction Proc Strategy • Project list incorporated in the database Q 2 AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER • MinComBud • 2nd draft SPs/APPs • 2nd MTEC hearings (if required) • Submit NT’s budget 2nd database • Draft EPRE • Project list / Table-B5 incorporated in the database Q 3 NOVEMBER DECEMBER • Finalisation of project list / Table-B5 and tabling of ECE • Benchmarking • Final EPRE • Budget Day • Tabling SPs/APPs • Finance Portfolio Com. Budget hearings JANUARY Q 4 FEBRUARY MARCH The budget process (2) Budget Process

  12. The budget process (3) Recurrent problems and potential risk areas During the budget process, as well as in-year, PT experiences the following recurring problems, and depts are urged to address these: • Budget related challenges: • Some depts. and public entities are still not involving the relevant portfolio committees in the budget process early enough, and this area needs to receive greater focus. This should be done before the submission is finalised and submitted to PT. Minutes from the portfolio committee meetings, or written confirmation from the HODs/CFOs should be submitted to allow the budget analysts to verify the committees’ involvement • There is often no alignment between budgeting and planning (both implementation plans and service delivery planning). This will be closely monitored by OTP and DPME going forward • Non adherence to submission deadlines, and/or the budget submissions are not signed off by the MEC and/or the Accounting Officer. Late submissions make it difficult for PT to meet the many tight deadlines stipulated during the process

  13. The budget process (4) Recurrent problems and potential risk areas • Budget related challenges continued…. • Lack of communication between public entities and parent depts, in particular where allocation letters and funding agreements are concerned. In some instances, depts are not involved in the functioning of, and provide no oversight in respect of the public entities that they are responsible for. DeptsMUST provide an analysis of the budget submissions of their public entities, with particular focus on the initiatives received from them • Some deptsare still not fully aligned to the sector specific budget and programme structures. In addition, some sectors continuously revise their budget structures, and this complicates and confuses the budget and planning processes unnecessarily • The ongoing restructuring of depts’ and public entities’ organograms needs to be carefully examined, monitored and controlled, as a large proportion of the provincial budget is tied up in COE spending and, hence, growth in staff numbers is likely to crowd out service delivery spending unless these numbers are carefully controlled • Deptsshould ensure that they comply with the Amended 2015 Organisational Design directive on changes to the organisational structures by depts. - issued by DPSA on 13 September 2016, specifically Section 9.6 in respect of consultation requirements

  14. The budget process (5) Recurrent problems and potential risk areas IYM related challenges: • A no. of deptsand public entities continue to submit their IYMs after the due dates, or information submitted is incomplete and/or of poor quality, and projections are not credible and some of the depts’ actual expenditure figures do not tie back to the Vulindlela figures (which feed from BAS reports) • Deptsand public entities are reminded about the effect of cash blocking, which effectively prevents over-spending as the BAS system is locked if there are insufficient funds in a dept’sbank account. Accurate projections are required from each deptin order that PT can anticipate the monthly and annual spending of the province as a whole, and undertake meaningful decisions • Depts are reminded of the PFMA and Treasury Regulation rules regarding Transfers and Capital. Newtransfers may not be introduced and existing transfers may not be increased without PT approval. Any reduction in a Transfer or Capital requires Legislature approval • PT is aware that many depts and public entities are unaware of the difference between funds that are earmarked for a specific purpose and funds that are specifically and exclusively appropriated in terms of an Appropriation Act

  15. The budget process (6) IYM related challenges: • Funds may be earmarked/ring-fenced for a specific purpose by PT, MTEC, Provincial Executive Council, etc. In this case, these funds will be shown to be earmarked in PT’s allocation letter. In terms of Section 6.3.1(c) of the TG, Treasury approval can be obtained to use these earmarked funds for other purposes • Funds may be specifically and exclusively appropriated for a specific purpose by PT, MTEC, Provincial Executive Council, etc. In this case, these funds will be highlighted as such in the Main Appropriation Act or the Adjustments Appropriation Act. In terms of Section 43(4) (a) of the PFMA, these funds cannot be used for any other purpose without Legislature approval (i.e. through another Appropriation Act). As such, PT cannot grant approval in this regard. This also means that, if funds that are specifically and exclusively appropriated are not spent by year-end, departments and public entities should show year-end under-expenditure by an amount that is equivalent to or larger than the amount specifically and exclusively appropriated • Funds budgeted for transfer to municipalities should be gazetted after the tabling of the budget and are also considered to be specifically and exclusively appropriated, and are indicated as such in the Main Appropriation Act or the Adjusted Appropriation Act. Transferring departments should monitor the spending of provincial funds by municipalities, so that unspent funds are returned to the Provincial Revenue Fund where they are not committed

  16. The budget process (7) Recurrent problems and potential risk areas The March “cash outflow” spike issue continues to be noted by PT, suggesting lack of proper planning on the part of departments, as well as fiscal dumping

  17. The budget process (8) Important dates • 31 July 2018 - Depts and public entities submit 1st draft 19/20 budget submissions and database to PT • 17,18,20,21 & 25 September 2018 - MTEC Hearings on 19/20 MTEF Budget Proposals for depts and public entities • 5,6,8,9 & 12 November 2018 - MTEC Hearings and 2nd quarter bi-laterals for 2018/19 & Proposed allocation for 19/20 MTEF for depts and public entities • 22 October 2018 - Depts submit 18/19 Adjustments Estimate input to PT • 7 November 2018 - Depts submit second draft 19/20 budgets (EPRE and database) to PT • 22 November 2018 - Tabling of 18/19 Provincial Adjustments Estimate • 7 March 2019 - Provincial Budget Day (to be confirmed)

  18. Before Budget Cuts

  19. Dealing with Budget Cuts

  20. Reprioritisation (1) • NT’s fiscal consolidation programme spans over a few years and KZN is therefore not expecting any significant additions to the baseline over the MTEF. This means we must look internally into our budgets for new projects and programs • Depts and entities may request funding for 2 once-off initiatives for the 19/20 MTEF Reprioritisation can be achieved through the following: • Spending must continue to become more efficient, and lower-priority spending must continue to be reduced. This is intended to ensure that funds are directed to service delivery rather than non-essential spending or frills • Channeling available resources to service delivery projects, placing emphasis on the efficient allocation and spending of funds, i.e. cost-cutting • Dept should also focus on reducing costs relating to core service delivery, particularly where improved SCM processes can result in efficient procurement of service delivery products • Curtailing Compensation of employeesspending, which is crowing out service delivery • Review and reprioritisation of departments’/public entities’ budgets. Implementation of ROPETT findings to be taken into account when preparing their 19/20 budget

  21. Reprioritisation (2) Establishing the 2019/20 baseline budget and salary adjustments • The equitable share baseline for 19/20 should be increased by 5.3% to create the 21/22 baselines. At this stage, the wage negotiations for 18/19 and beyond have not been finalised. At present, the offer by the employer is as per table below. Unless instructed otherwise, deptsshould use the current offer in their budgeting for COE • Public entities not aligned to the Public Service Co-ordinating Bargaining Council (PSCBC) must ensure that they make adequate provision for salary increases within their baselines. Deptsshould make provision for all personnel related allowances such as long service recognition, danger allowance, etc. These increases are reflected in the table below:

  22. Format of 2019/20 MTEF budget submissions (1) The 19/20 MTEF budget submissions of depts/public entities (i.e. submission of the reprioritised baseline allocations) must follow the prescribed format, and should include the following: • MEC’s letter • Accounting Officer’s/Accounting Authority’s covering letter • Explanatory memorandum including departmental analysis and recommendations of public entity inputs (where applicable) including once-off initiatives fully evaluated • Dept to provide PT with proof that the draft budget was presented to respective portfolio committees • 19/20 MTEF budget submission, i.e. the Excel template comprising the following: • Baseline analysis (MTEC database for depts and entities) • MTEC database for public entities • Costing of initiatives • Draft 17/18 Annual Report • Draft 19/20 Annual Performance Plan • If necessary, PT may request additional information in support of a particular dept’s/public entity’s submission

  23. Format of 2019/20 MTEF budget submissions (2) Costing of initiatives Depts and public entities are permitted to submit 2 once-off initiatives. Social sector (Education, Health and Social Development) depts may request funding for national initiatives. PT will assess compliance of submissions in terms of the following evaluation criteria set, which are the basis for making recommendations to MTEC regarding funding of new budget proposals: • Is it clear how the initiative contributes to the govt policy priorities, as well as clearly aligned to the PGDP/PEMP? • Is the initiative aligned to core functions? • Has the dept/public entity provided credible service delivery information/motivation with initiative submitted? • Is the costing/initiative realistic and comprehensive? • Has there been adequate political involvement in the budget formulation process? • Has the dept/public entity undergone thorough reprioritisation with a view to fund part of the initiative from within budget?

  24. Format of 2019/20 MTEF budget submissions (3) Costing of initiatives • It is emphasised that, if initiatives have carry-through costs, they will not be considered • Initiatives can be spread over a period of two or three years, as long as the initiative has an end-date within the MTEF • Initiatives must be ranked in order of priority, and must include: • motivation • costing • service delivery information • In the case of the social sector depts, Education, Health and Social Development, a separate template must be completed for each proposed national priority

  25. Thank you Presenter: Nomthi Mjuza Director: Provincial Budget Management 033-897 4540

More Related