PEMPAL Steering Committee meeting
October3, 2013, 3:30-5:30 p.m. CET; Video Conference
M I N U T E S
Present (last names in alphabetic order)
Members (7):Irene Frei (Donor, SECO), Diana Grosu-Axenti (IACOP Chair, MoF Moldova),Marius Koen (SC Chair, The World Bank), Olga Korolyova (Donor, MoF Russian Federation), Elena Nikulina (PEMPAL Task Team Leader, The World Bank), Gela Prodani (BCOP Chair, WB Office in Tirana, Albania), and Angela Voronin (TCOP Chair, MoF Moldova)
Permanent Observers (2): Deanna Aubrey (PEMPAL PFM Advisor), andRobert Bauchmüller (PEMPAL Secretariat)
Observers (2):Ion Chicu (TCOP Advisor, The World Bank), Maya Gusarova (BCOP Advisor, The World Bank Country Office, Russia), Gašper Pleško (Center of Excellence in Finance), and Arman Vatyan (IACOP Advisor, The World Bank Country Office, Armenia)
1.Welcome new member from SECO
The Chair of the Steering Committee (SC), Mr. Koen (The World Bank), welcomed everyone attending, and confirmed the agenda for the meeting.He extended a warm welcome toMs. Irene Frei,the new SC member representingthe Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO).
2.Update on funding
Ms. Nikulina(PEMPAL Task Team Leader, The World Bank)pointed out that resources available for the network are the same as reported at the previous SC meeting,as there have been no new contributions to the PEMPAL network (See Annex 1).
Ms. Nikulina proposed a revision of the FY14 PEMPAL budget allocation for Cross-COP plenary activitiesfrom USD 450,000 to USD 700,000, of which USD 550,000 are revised estimated costs of the main plenary meeting and USD 150,000 are estimated costs of the COP events attached to the plenary (See Annex 2). In clarification of the additional resources required for the main plenary, Ms. Nikulina referred to consultations with the Chair of the SC and with the MoF of the Russian Federation, and stressed that cost estimates for that meeting turned out to be higher than earlier anticipated based on the most recent cost information for conference and hotel facilities in Moscow. Ms. Nikulina also proposed to revise the presentation of the FY14 COP budgets by removing the funds earmarked for the cross-COP plenary activities from the COP budgets and showing them as a separate line in the overall program budget table. .
Ms. Freiexpressed concerns regarding the flexibility of the planned budget, and asked whether the upper cap to the budget reserved for Cross-COP plenary activities is expected to be sufficient. Ms. Nikulinaemphasized the difficulty of predicting any final amountsasactivities of the COPs are still not fully defined.
2.1.Conclusions
The SC approved the revised budget proposed by Ms. Nikulina.The required amount of USD 700,000 for Cross-COP plenary activities (with 15% flexibility) has been approved, and will be provided from the general PEMPAL budget.
COPs will not be requested to contribute any further financial resources for the execution of the Moscow Cross-COPplenary meetings. USD 150,000 of funds earmarked in each of the COP budgets for the Moscow events will be taken out of the COPs’ budgets – the COP budget overview will be updated by the Secretariat accordingly.
3.Update on COP budgets
Mr. Bauchmüller(PEMPAL Secretariat) referred to the overview on COPs’ FY13 and FY14 budgets, and highlighted changes that have been introduced in the Secretariat’s COP budget overview, makingit more straight-forward and clear (See Annex 3). He thanked the COPs for providing updated overviews of their planned activities and indicative budgets after the last Steering Committee.
Mr. Bauchmüller explained in particular the current state of budget execution, highlighting that all COPs’ total amounts of committed and actual expenses for the first quarter of the fiscal year 2014 are within the approved annual budget set by the SC. However, he pointed out that there is a need for IACOP to either revise their agenda of planned events for the rest of the fiscal year, or to request the SC to allocate additional funding due to the costs incurred for the St Petersburg event.
BCOP resource team proposed to the Secretariat not to split the indicative budget by envisaged study visit but to leave it as an aggregate amount, as proposed earlier.
3.1.Conclusions
The SC asked the Secretariat to revise the FY14 COP budget overview according to the revised PEMPAL budget (as discussed under the agenda item ‘Update on Funding’ above) showing the available annual COP budgets net of the $150,000 contributions earmarked for the Moscow event. It should becirculated among SC members as soon as possible, preferably with the minutes of the meeting.
4.IACOP request of extra funds for a Study Visit to South Africa in December
Ms. Grosu-Axenti (Chair of IACOP) briefed the SC about the planned study visit (SV) of IACOP to South Africa, scheduled for December 2013. The budget required for the execution of the SV is still not clear andfurther information is required. She emphasized that a SC decision had already been made in FY 13 to allow for an additional IACOP SV, but the approved additional funds were not utilized in FY 13. Due to unforeseen circumstances this SV could not be undertaken and it was decided to move it to FY 14 provided that the SC would be willing to allocate funds.
Ms. Korolyova (Donor, MoF Russian Federation) expressed concerns pertaining to IACOP’s budget and, in light of the risk to have not sufficient budget for later activities,she emphasized the need for its revision. Mr. Korolyova also shared a reservation about the need for such a SV and asked whether there are not less expensive alternatives available. Ms. Grosu-Axenti clarified that the SV would be in a similar price range as other recent PEMPAL visits. She reconfirmed the need to revise IACOP’s budget prior to SV implementation and also stressed a discussion will be held again within the Executive Committee regarding the issue.
Several points of view were put forward for why the South African model is worth studying, for example, because it differs from those encountered in European countries and it is a model from another continent that will allow for South-South knowledge sharing. A SV to South Africa would thus provide an opportunity to examine an advanced and unique model.
Ms. Nikulina emphasized the relevance ofthe discussion regarding IACOP’s envisaged SV to South Africa as similar requests from other COPs for SVs locations outside of the ECA region are expected soon. She proposed that the SC addresses in its next meeting howto accommodate this new reality in the Operational Guidelines of the PEMPAL network.
4.1.Conclusions
The Steering Committee requested IACOP Executive Committee to submit a written justification for a Study Visit to South Africa, and a budget not exceeding the planed amount of USD 45.000 with 15 percent flexibility. This will be circulated among SC members for approval via no-objection written correspondenceas soon as possible.
5.Update on Cross-COP Plenary Moscow preparations
Ms. Nikulina briefed the SC on developments regarding the Cross-COP Plenaryin Moscow, starting May 28, 2014. She briefed the SC on consultations with the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation during which the draft concept of the event, a possible location logistics, and organizational aspects were discussed.
Mr. Bauchmüller confirmed that the Secretariat is informed about two pre-meetings of the Cross-COP (2 days for IACOP, and 1 day for TCOP). Ms. Gelardina (BCOP Chair) added that BCOP has decided to have a 1 day pre-meeting.
Ms. Nikulina stressed the importance of timely preparations and urged the Organizing Committee to start with activities for the event as early as possible. She also highlighted the need to communicate to the Secretariat what visual and other materials COPswill require. An internal discussion should thus take place within each respective COP so as to enable and speed up the finalization of the draft concept.
5.1.Conclusions
After the SC meeting, the PEMPAL Secretariat will share with Ms. Nikulina and Ms. Aubrey any feedback it received on the draft concept note (Annex 4) for the Cross-COP plenary. The Secretariat will solicit from SECO and SIGMA any comments on the draft concept note for the Cross-COP plenary meeting by October 10, 2013; should they not respond by that date, the SC will consider this as their consent.
Chairs of the COPs will provide the Secretariat with information on the format and size of their COP’s pre-meetings as well as their plans for promotional activities (and the related materials needed) by 31 October, 2013.
The SC invited SECO once more to join the Organizing Committee. The Secretariat has been asked to express the same invitation to OECD-SIGMA.
By October 15, Ms. Nikulina will propose to the Secretariat a date for the first meeting of the Organizing Committee. The Secretariat will then facilitate the organization of that meeting.
6.Request of State Treasury of Hungary to join TCOP
Ms. Voronin (Chair of TCOP) informed SC that a request from the State Treasury of Hungary has been received to join the TCOP. She proposed to the SC to accept the request.
Ms. Nikulina shared her supportof the request from Hungary to join the TCOP and clarified that Hungary is already a member of IACOP. However, she pointed out that Hungary as a high income country is a special case.
6.1.Conclusions
The SC confirmed that the State Treasury of Hungary can become member of TCOP and that the rules stated in ARTICLE 1, Section 3 of the PEMPAL Operational Guidelines will therefore apply.
7.Request for approval of PEMPAL Newsletter covering April to September 2013
Mr. Bauchmüller asked the SC to approve the proposed Newsletter on PEMPAL activities in the period April to September 2013 (See Annex 5).
Ms. Aubrey emphasized that plenary meetings, small group meetings and study visits should not be grouped together but rather reported separately.
Ms. Nikulina stressed the importance of improving the presentation of the Newsletter (e.g. adding some photos, making it more promotional), and doing some additional editing (e.g. moving longer statistic tables to an annex).
Mr. Bauchmüller thanked for comments and clarifiedthat PEMPAL newsletters will soon be published on a quarterly basis – the current issue covering a half-year period by exception. A first draft was distributed for comment for the first two quarters of 2013.
7.1.Conclusions
Once changes are incorporated, the Newsletter should be circulated among SC members for approval via no-objection written correspondence.
As part of the ongoing development of these newsletters, the Secretariat will liaise and coordinate with the World Bank resource team on its periodic promotional reporting to ensure a consistent approach with such reporting of the World Bank is adopted.
8.Other Business
Ms. Nikulina put forward that a new chair of the SC is soon to be nominated by the Russian Federation. She inquired whether there is any indication when the new chair will be known and stressed that it should be nominated soon enough so she/he will be adequately familiar with PEMPAL activities prior to Cross-COP Plenary in May next year.
Mr. Koen expressed his readiness to chair the next SC meeting, and thus introduce the new Chair to the work of SC in a timely manner. He stressed that a name of the new Chair should be known by the end of 2013.
8.1.Conclusions
Ms. Korolyovasupported the suggestion and stressed that discussions regarding the new SC chair are underway, and she will communicate the information as soon as possible.
9.Time proposal for next meeting
The next Steering Committee meeting is envisaged for January 16 or 23, 2014. Invitations will be shared shortly by the Secretariat.
Annexes:
- PEMPAL budget –June 2013
(English version)(Russian version)
- PEMPAL budget – October 2013
(English version)(Russian version)
- COP budget overview – October 2013 (updated)
Documents will be added shortly.
- Cross-COP Moscow plenary meeting – draft concept note
(English version)(Russian version)
- Draft PEMPAL newsletter – April to September 2013
(English version)(Russian version)
1