Since 2003 Iraq’s budget has steadily increased. That year it
was a measly $6 billion and by 2013 it was over $116 billion. In the first
couple years Baghdad struggled to execute its budget, but that rate has
improved as well with time. Unfortunately the government still has major
problems spending its investment money holding back the rebuilding of the
country.
As Iraq regained its sovereignty and petroleum profits picked up
so did the size of its budget. In 2003 the Americans only allocated $6.1 billion for
the Iraqis to spend. That quickly jumped to $19.9 billion the following year,
then $24.4 billion in 2005, $34 billion in 2006, $41.1 billion in 2007, $72.2
billion in 2008, before dipping to $58.6 billion when oil prices dropped in
2009. That quickly recovered to $72.4 billion in 2010, $82.6 billion in 2011,
$100 billion in 2012, and $118.6
billion in 2013. The budget is divided into two parts. One is the
operational budget, which goes largely to salaries, pensions, and costs. With
the government being the main employer in the country this is by far the
largest portion of the overall budget. The other part is the capital budget,
which is used for investment. As the overall budget has climbed so has the
amount apportioned for development. In 2004 there was
no capital budget, then it went up to $3 billion in 2005, $11 billion in
2006, $12 billion in 2007, $24
billion in 2008, $25.7
billion by 2011, and $31.88
billion in 2012. From 2009 to 2013 the proportion of the capital budget to
the overall budget went from 25% to
40%. Iraq needs to increase the amount of money that it invests because it
is in such great need after decades of wars and sanctions. The move towards a
larger capital budget shows that the government is finally thinking of the
future. The problem is spending all of the money that is appropriated.
Size
Of Iraqi Budget 2003-2013
2003 $6.1 bil
2004 $19.9 bil
2005 $24.4 bil
2006 $34 bil
2007 $41.1 bil
2008 $72.2 bil
2009 $58.6 bil
2010 $72.4 bil
2011 $82.6 bil
2012 $100 bil
2013 $118.6 bil
In recent years Baghdad has increased its efficiency, but there
are still major issues. As the amount of money appropriated in the budget has
increased the overall execution rate has improved. In 2005, the government executed 73% of the budget. That
went down to 68% in
2006, where it would remain for the next two years. By 2009 it jumped to
80% where it stayed at until 2012. In 2013 the Planning Ministry reported that only
27.4% of the 2012 budget was completed. Execution of the capital budget has
been lower with only 23% in 2005, 22%
in 2006, 28% in 2007, and 39% in 2008. The United Nations claims that
Baghdad made vast improvement from 2009-2012 spending 60-70% of its capital
budget. The United States Agency for
International Development (USAID) however reported
that the central government still struggled only executing 22% in 2009, 28% in
2010, 31% in 2011, and 32% in 2012. Given Iraq’s history, the USAID figures
might be more accurate. The overall execution rate has continued to go up since
most of the budget is for operational costs, which are necessary to keep the
government running. Spending the capital budget is far more complicated because
it involves planning, contracting, the completion of project, etc. These
problems are largely why Iraq has an annual surplus despite predicted deficits,
because so much money is leftover each year.
Execution
of Budget 2005-2013
2005 73%
2006 68%
2007 67%
2008 68%
2009 80%
2010 83%
2011 79%
2012 27.4%
Execution
Of Iraq Capital Budget 2005-2008
2005 23%
2006 22%
2007 28%
2008 39%
Execution
Of Iraq Capital Budget 2009-2010 – U.N. Figures
2009-2010 60-70%
Execution
Of Iraq Capital Budget 2009-2012 – USAID Figures
2009 22%
2010 28%
2011 31%
2012 32%
When broken down by ministry some have consistently
underperformed, while others have done quite well in implementing their budgets.
The Oil Ministry is one of the most important because it is responsible for
developing and selling the main source of revenue for the nation. In 2009 the
Oil Ministry was only able to spend 15% of its budget. In 2010 it more than
doubled that rate to 44%, but then went down to 32% in 2011. On the other hand
the security ministries, Interior and Defense have done quite well. In 2009
both ministries executed 90% of their budgets, followed by 87% for Defense and
82% for the Interior in 2010, and 76% for Interior and 70% for Defense in 2011.
The Ministry of Migration and Displacement has also bee at the top of the list
spending 114% of its budget in 2009, 92% in 2010, and 144% in 2011. In total,
in 2009 17 out of 26 ministries executed 70% or more of their budgets, 18 did
so in 2009, before dipping to 11 ministries in 2011. The ministries have proven
inconsistent in spending their budgets. Just because one year a ministry might
do a good job executing their money doesn’t mean they will do the same or
better the next. Some like Oil have consistently been at the bottom. This again
holds up development.
The provinces do an even worse job. In 2010, only six out of 18
governorates spent 70% or more of their budgets. Those were Maysan 73%, Dhi Qar
75%, the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) 80%, and Baghdad 91%. Some like
Qadisiyah, 9%, Basra, 11%, Diyala, 12%, Ninewa, 14%, Tamim, 22%, Wasit, 22%,
and Najaf, 23%, didn’t even spend a quarter of their appropriations. In 2011
they did slightly better with eight provinces spending 70% or more of the
budget, with only two, Basra 8% and Ninewa 24%, below the 25% mark. A major
issue with the governorates is that the ministries wield most of the power in
the country, leaving the provinces with limited ability to spend their funds.
The Oil Ministry for example, controls most of the land in Basra, which held up
25% of its budget in 2010 and 2011 for things like housing construction.
Provincial
Budget Execution 2010
Qadisiyah 9%
Basra 11%
Diyala 12%
Ninewa 14%
Tamim 22%
Wasit 22%
Najaf 23%
Salahaddin 25%
Babil 39%
Karbala 48%
Muthanna 50%
Anbar 52%
Maysan 73%
Dhi Qar 75%
KRG 80%
Baghdad 91%
Provincial
Budget Execution 2011
Basra 8%
Ninewa 24%
Diyala 34%
Tamim 37%
Babil 41%
Maysan 47%
Baghdad 48%
Karbala 57%
Qadisiyah 61%
Wasit 65%
Dhi Qar 71%
Muthanna 76%
Najaf 78%
Salahaddin 84%
KRG 100%
Anbar 100%
There are a number of other problems holding up the government
from spending all of its appropriations. Poor management is one. In 2009, the
state-owned Iraqi Oil Tankers Company leased two tankers for 5.2 billion
dinars, but stopped using them for a loss of 1.7 billion dinars. At the Public
Works Ministry seven out of 15 projects in 2011 had an execution rate of 50% or
less due to the lack of oversight. There is bad planning. In 2010 the Industry
Ministry’s General Company for Sugar stopped producing for a year, because it
said it wasn’t given any money to rehabilitate its factories. Many times
provinces, ministries and other agencies create overlapping projects, because
there is a lack of coordination between the different offices and levels of
government. Red tape leads to huge delays within the government. In 2011,
delays in approving and funding projects meant the Planning Ministry only spent
10% of its capital budget. The top down management style means that many
decisions must go all the way to the minister for approval no matter how
miniscule they are before anything can move forward. Political disputes in
parliament are leading to longer and longer delays in the passage of the
budget. That was a major reason why less than 30% of the 2012 budget was ever
executed. There are problems with the bidding process for public projects, and
no penalties for delays or not completing contracts. Corruption takes a huge
chunk out of every budget. Finally, the lack of consistent electricity holds up
development and leads to additional costs. There have been several suggestions
to fix these issues. The Finance and Planning Ministry have demanded better
accountability and transparency in the budget. They have also called for
consisted reporting on projects, and for those with less than 25% execution
rate to be questioned by the cabinet and parliament. The central government has
also discussed integrating the provinces into the planning process more to
improve their performances. Unfortunately, Iraq has a disjointed and
dysfunctional government. Different political parties run each ministry and
they are jealous of their power and largely unwilling to cooperate with each
other. The ministries also refuse to appear before parliament, and recent court
rulings have said the legislature has no authority to question a minister
unless there is evidence of a crime being committed. The result is that the
status quo is likely to be maintained for the foreseeable future rather than
any meaningful reforms being carried out despite the huge costs this imposes
upon the country.
There are both positives and negatives when analyzing Iraq’s
budget. The amount of money appropriated has consistently gone up with the
exception of 2009 when oil prices dipped. The proportion going to the capital
budget has increased as well, which is especially important because that means
parliament is thinking about the future. The overall execution rate has
improved as well. On the other hand, the structural problems within the
government are still daunting. Poor discipline within the ministries means that
too many projects are either not finished or never even executed. That’s why
the spending rate for the capital budget has not improved much. The
centralization of power by the ministries also means that many of the plans of
the provinces are useless, because they lack the authority to carry them out. Baghdad
needs to prioritize the capital budget, and implement serious accountability
and transparency rules so that projects are well planned and completed. There
is little impetus from the top to implement these reforms even though they have
been talked about for several years now and recommended by outside groups like
the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the United States. Until
there is political will from the top nothing will change.
SOURCES
Associated Press, “Iraqi lawmaker defends country’s spending
record,” 8/8/08
Department of Defense, “Measuring Stability and Security in
Iraq,” June 2009
Jafar, Seerwan, “never enough: how much money does iraq
really need for budget?” Niqash, 12/13/12
Joint Analysis Unit, “Iraq Budget Execution,” U.N. Iraq,
February 2014
Sabah, Mohammad, “The rate of implementation of state
institutions for the 2012 budget did not exceed 28% and communication are the
lowest,” Al-Mada, 10/10/13
Salaheddin, Sinan, “Parliament approves national budget for
Iraq,” Associated Press, 3/7/13
Al-Salhy, Suadad, “Iraqi lawmakers pass 2011 budget,”
Reuters, 2/20/11
Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction,
“Quarterly and Semiannual Report to the United States Congress,” 7/30/08
- “Quarterly Report to the United States Congress,” 4/30/12
Tijara Provincial Economic Growth Program, “Assessment of
Current and Anticipated Economic Priority In Iraq,” United States Agency for
International Development, 10/4/12
United States Government Accountability Office, “IRAQ Key
Issues for Congressional Oversight,” March 2009
- “Iraqi Revenues, Expenditures, and Surplus,” August 2008
- “Progress Report: Some Gains Made, Updated Strategy
Needed,” June 2008
No comments:
Post a Comment