Bunge-Lenye-Meno-A-Parliament-with-Teeth-for-Tanzania-LAXNNAJ547

Conclusions and Recommendations
Mr Sitta is satisfied that the danger of parallel accountability is
understood by donors. The issue had been considered seriously during
the preparation of the new Standing Orders which regulate government
business. A proposed Bunge Foundation would institutionalise
consultation between parliament, the Development Partners Group and
other interests from civil society. In view of the close diplomatic ties
between the government and its bilateral donors, Mr Sitta believes it
would not be appropriate to compel representatives of sovereign states
to report to the PAC.
Dr Slaa argues that once the executive has entered into a contractual
relationship with donors, the terms of that agreement should be
disclosed in their entirety to parliament. In his view, the published
reports from the Development Partners Group fell short of full
disclosure. He welcomes the increased attention to parliament shown by
donors, and visits by diplomats and aid officials to Dodoma. In
principle, he would like donor funding to be restricted to capital
investment such as infrastructure. Current account spending, including
MPs’ salaries, should be funded from domestic revenues.
Mr Cheyo admires the institutional arrangement between donors and
parliament in Mozambique, where Development Partners report – in
person – to the PAC. He wants the same arrangement for Tanzania,
where he is concerned that donors possess more detailed analysis of the
government’s performance than is available to MPs. He is critical of
project aid, notably the actions of USAID and the United Nations High
Commission for Refugees which fall outside the scrutiny of the PAC.
Priorities for reform include:
• Institutionalised briefings between donors and parliamentarians
• More disclosure of donors’ performance audits of the public sector
71