`PRBS Open Meeting

22ndNovember 2005 at the PRBS Secretariat

Minutes

Attending:

Erik JonssonEmbassy of Sweden Chair

Jacob Dal WintherEmbassy of Denmark

Marko NokkalaEmbassy of Finland

John PiperDFID

Allister MoonWorld Bank

Astrid RugeWorld Bank

Tor HaugEmbassy of Norway

Martin SaladinSDC

Mamoru EndoEmbassy of Japan

Shunichiro HondaJICA

Machiko TsuburaJICA

Britta OltmannKfW/German Development Cooperation

James BiancoEmbassy of Ireland

Haika E.S MbagaIMF

Cam DoCIDA

Jonathan WolseyEC

Douglas CarpenterEC

Halima HashiADB

Satu SantalaEmbassy of Finland

Elisabeth BorvePRBS Secretariat

Pauline MrossoPRBSSecretariat Minutes

Agenda:

1. Status of Annual Report

2. Status of MoU including PAF

3. Lessons learned of AR 05 and the way forward

4. AOB

1. Status of Annual Review Report

The group was informed that the latest version for the Annual review Report has been sent out by MoF (hard copies) and the PRBSsecretariat (soft copies),and that most of the text is agreed by the respective thematic groups with exception of GovernanceWorking Group who has not yet agreed on theirreport. The text found in the report is an agreed version with GoTand not agreed on the DP side.

The chair proposed that there is a need to hold a meeting with both GoT and DPleads on Governance together with MoF to sort out the existing problems and lead to an agreed report which will be included in the final Annual Review report. GoT is eagertofinalize the report for DPs to confirm their commitments as started in the MoU.

Proposed deadline for final report was by the end of the week.

General comments on the Report

  • Comments were made that the report does not reflect sufficiently the remarks made by DPs, and in some views do not have the required quality. It was proposed that there is a need of updating PSD and PFM sections as the available text in the PSD report was there even before the review and the PFM report lacks coherence. The group had high expectations on next AR report.
  • Some felt that the report does not givesufficient room for critical comments andthe group felt that there is need for critical comments to be captured in the report, and this has to be discussed with GoT.

2. Status MoU and PAF

DPs were informed by the secretariat that a meetinghad been held between DP and GoT secretariat andthat the DP secretariat had expressed concern that the MoU and PAF was distributed 12th November 2005to all DPs without final clarification from the DP Secretariat..

Consequently, not all issues raised by DPs were reflected in the PAF, including a agreed proposal from IMF. The chair informed that while waiting for HQs feedback on the MoU the secretariat will work with MoF on final adjustments to the PAF

DPs were informed that the deadline for receiving comments on the MoU is still 30th November 2005.

Further more the meeting was informed that the decision regarding the signing ceremony will be made by HoC. Next HoC meeting is scheduled on 5th December 2005.

On the HIV/AIDS outcome indicator, Britta Oltmann promised to forwarda proposal that had been agreed in the subgroup for the secretariat to ensure that it is reflected in the final PAF.

Some expressed concern regarding use of the Temporary Process Action column for disbursement decisions, and stressed the need for a discussion between DPs on how to use the matrix. It was suggested that a pluralistic approach from DPs is acceptable as long as it isaccompanied by greater transparency on the relationship between PAF and disbursements.

The need for greater clarity on how the different DP would use the PAF was recognized, and for this purpose a special meeting on the subject would in the near future.

The meeting was then informed that the donor mapping matrixcould reflect how each agency will use the PAF matrix for disbursement decisions. The meeting agreed that the secretariat should distribute the matrix for update on this and also for some remaining agencies to update their numbers. The donor mapping matrix would be forwarded to GoT when finalized.

It was revealed that for the PRBS to pass through satisfactory review DPs need to get a clear understanding on what GoT thinks on Sector reviews.A note which has been prepared by some members of the PAF task force (WB/Dfid) will be circulated to the group from the secretariat. Questions were raised on the status of the note and to what degree it reflected the groups consolidated views. During the discussion it was made clear that the note was of informal character and a response to a direct request to the members from MoF.

3. Lessons learned of AR 05 and the way forward

On lessons learnt, DPs secretariat received good and mostly constructive response from the group and this is highly appreciated by the secretariat. Response had been received from DPs, those that had not responded has still the possibility to do so during the week.

The secretariat had distributed a compilation of the response and it was agreed that there is a need for DPs to go through the suggestionsanddiscuss lessons learnt and secretariat work plan in a more structured way. A special meeting on this will held soon.

4. AOB

  • PER working group meeting, 22nd November, 14:00 pm at the Karimjee Hall. Included on the agenda harmonization of PER/GBS/MKUKUTA working groups.
  • HoC meeting scheduled on Monday 5th December 2005
  • Mamuro Endo informed the meeting that the Japan Embassy has Mission from Japan, and they might want to know how the PRBS works.He request for the group participation in case the need arises.
  • Donor mapping, reminder on Donor mapping finalization.