NABO published FY 2015 Final Accounts Analysis by Committee in order to support standing committees and the Special Committee on Budget and Accounts of the National Assembly in reviewing the government’s final accounts of FY 2015.
As the deliberation of the budget and final accounts is executed by each standing committee and the Special Committee on Budget and Accounts, NABO exerted strenuous efforts in developing committee-specific analysis reports in consideration of their significance. The core principles that underpin these reports are as follows:

First, they offer macro and comprehensive analysis and recommendations for policy improvements based on analysis of the major pending issues of each committee.

Second, they improve validity and neutrality in selecting analysis topics through organizing a plenary council of analysts and seeking third-party oversight. 

Third, they enhance objective validation with multi-layered investigation processes from the planning stage.

The reports mainly reviewed 487 topics (646 as subtopics) from 51 ministerial programs under the supervision of 15 standing committees. Highlights of the analysis are as follows:

First, the Ministry of Strategy and Finance evaluates public funds via the Fund Management Assessment Team. The transparency of the process should be enhanced by broadening the scope of public information from the results of medium-term available asset evaluation, and for the public funds that show poor performance in asset management, the Ministry needs to execute root-cause analysis and come up with recommendations for their improvement.

Second, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy needs to abolish the highest selling price scheme for briquettes and directly support low-income households that consume briquettes. The Ministry must also revisit its subsidies to bridge the gap between power generation costs and the selling price of coal and the financial aid for the education of mine workers’ children.

Third, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport needs to improve its standards of selecting suppliers for the New Stay scheme, which is mainly composed of large construction companies today. In order to revamp unreasonable regulations on project operators for the
supply promotion districts, related laws and rules should be amended.