Parliamentary Committees bring about accountability in public expenditure. Discuss.

Types of Parliamentary Committees Involved in Financial Scrutiny

Several Parliamentary Committees play a significant role in overseeing public expenditure:

• Public Accounts Committee (PAC): Examines reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) after they have been laid before Parliament. It assesses whether money was spent according to the law, whether it achieved the desired outcome, and whether it was economically and efficiently spent.
• Estimates Committee: Scrutinizes the estimates presented with the Budget and suggests improvements. It examines policy underlying the estimates and reports on matters of economy and efficiency.
• Committee on Public Undertakings: Examines reports of CAG on public sector undertakings and assesses their performance, efficiency, and management.
• Finance Committee: Provides suggestions regarding financial matters, including revenue and expenditure.

Mechanisms for Ensuring Accountability

Parliamentary Committees employ several mechanisms to ensure accountability in public expenditure:

• Examination of Budgetary Allocations: The Estimates Committee scrutinizes the proposed budgetary allocations, questioning the rationale behind spending decisions and suggesting modifications to improve efficiency.
• Review of CAG Reports: The PAC meticulously examines CAG reports, summoning officials from relevant ministries and departments to explain discrepancies and irregularities. The CAG’s reports highlight instances of rule violations, wasteful expenditure, and procedural lapses.
• Submission of Reports and Recommendations: Committees submit detailed reports to Parliament, outlining their findings and recommendations. These reports often lead to corrective actions by the government.
• Evidence Gathering & Witness Examination: Committees have the power to summon witnesses, including government officials, experts, and stakeholders, to provide evidence and clarify issues.
• Site Visits: Committees often undertake site visits to assess the implementation of projects and programs on the ground.

Impact of Committee Reports – Examples

Several committee reports have led to significant improvements in public expenditure management:

• 2G Spectrum Allocation Scam (PAC Report, 2013): The PAC’s report on the 2G spectrum allocation scam exposed irregularities and corruption, leading to the cancellation of licenses and subsequent legal proceedings.
• Coal Block Allocation Scam (PAC Report, 2013): Similar to the 2G scam, the PAC report on coal block allocation highlighted irregularities and lack of transparency, resulting in the cancellation of coal blocks.
• Defence Procurement (PAC Reports): PAC reports have consistently pointed out delays and cost overruns in defence procurement, prompting the Ministry of Defence to address these issues.

Limitations and Challenges

Despite their importance, Parliamentary Committees face certain limitations:

• Political Polarization: Committee deliberations can be affected by political polarization, leading to partisan viewpoints and hindering consensus-building.
• Lack of Expertise: MPs may not always possess the specialized expertise required to thoroughly scrutinize complex financial matters.
• Government Influence: The government can influence the selection of committee members and the agenda, potentially compromising the independence of the committees.
• Implementation of Recommendations: The government is not bound to implement the recommendations of the committees, and many recommendations remain unimplemented.