This is a timely, important book for fiscal policy-makers and budget practitioners. It assesses why some advanced democracies were prepared for the global financial crisis and others were not, and how some countries responded in ways that exacerbated fiscal instability. Its dozen country cases offer highly relevant lessons for mitigating cyclical disturbances that frequently beset national budgets and for managing public finances during turbulent times. The key takeaway message is that government capacity and budget policies matter and should dispel the notion that all countries are helpless when crisis strikes.' - Allen Schick, University of Maryland, USThe global financial crisis of 2007-09 constituted the biggest shock to the economies of the OECD nations since the Second World War, testing budgetary systems and causing most of their governments to move into intense crisis mode. Policy responses by governments and international authorities included massive interventions to stabilize markets and economies, and significant adjustments to fiscal policy regimes. How governments reacted to the crisis, which was manifested differently in each jurisdiction, had significant political implications for sitting governments and led to reforms of fiscal policy and budgetary regimes, which have since continued to wrestle with slow economic growth and strained public finances. This singular shock provides the editors and authors of this book with an intriguing opportunity to examine how different OECD budgetary systems performed. The contributions frame and assess how governments responded to the challenge and how their budget systems evolved in the aftermath, with a focus on strategy, decision-making and balancing competing demands. Chapters cover the EU, North America and Asia, including comparison between countries that fared well, those who were moderately affected and those countries massively affected by the global financial crisis. This timely book will appeal to students and academics seeking an international understanding and analysis of the effects and consequences of the global financial crisis. Contributors: M.G. Arghyrou, R. Boyle, S. Davidsen, T. Degen, D.M. Fantone, D.A. Good, M. Horie, L. Jensen, E. A. Lindquist, M. Mulreany, P.T. Pereira, P.L. Posner, J. de Vries, J. Wanna, L. Wemans, E. Zapico-Goni

How do Australian governments budget? How well do they spend and manage our money? Governments seem to be locked in a constant struggle with the problems of budgeting. Cabinet never has enough resources to go around, and while some agencies 'guard' public expenditure, others find endless ways to make new claims on budgets. Managing Public Expenditure in Australia provides the first systematic analysis of government budgeting and the politics of the budgetary process. Drawing on extensive original sources, the authors examine debates and reforms in public finance from Whitlam and Fraser to Hawke, Keating and Howard, and assess their impacts on policy development. In tracking the way governments actually spend money, Managing Public Expenditure in Australia provides an alternate and complementary political history of federal government over the past forty years. This book also includes accessible discussions on topics such as budget theory, financial management in government, and debt and deficit reduction. An explanation of new resource management techniques and initiatives help to illuminate the ongoing changes to budget and expenditure management practices. This is an essential purchase for students, teachers and practitioners of public finance, and for anyone involved in the continuing debate over the nature and role of the public sector.

One of the most important functions of modern government is to marshal and deploy resources to achieve desired objectives and outcomes. This task is overseen by the Central Budget Agencies (such as Ministries of Finance and Treasuries) who have the responsibility of generating tax revenue, and controlling and allocating public expenditure. This extensive comparative study investigates the changing nature and role of Central Budget Agencies (CBAs) in ten countries reflecting a spectrum of different institutional and constitutional contexts. Eighteen expert contributors offer detailed accounts of the various trajectories that have occurred within their respective CBAs, set against the changing political environment in which they operate. A recurring theme throughout is an evaluation of the power and agenda-setting roles of CBAs, assessing how their influence has grown or waned over time. An important feature of the book is that each chapter attempts to incorporate external scholarly analyses with internal practitioner views. Four key areas are examined in each of the CBAs, including: * the changing roles and responsibilities of CBAs * the politics of the budget process and the influence of CBAs * administrative and post-administrative cultures inside government * future prospects and directions for the CBAs. The original research presented in this book provides a new window into the world of CBAs, adding an important contribution to the scholarly research on public finance and government budgeting. It will also assist many CBAs to re-evaluate their roles and contributions to public budgeting and public sector management. This volume is required reading for anyone wanting to gain greater insight into whether CBAs really are the best guardians of the public purse.

How do Australian governments budget? How well do they spend and manage our money? Governments seem to be locked in a constant struggle with the problems of budgeting. Cabinet never has enough resources to go around, and while some agencies 'guard' public expenditure, others find endless ways to make new claims on budgets.Managing Public Expenditure in Australia provides the first systematic analysis of government budgeting and the politics of the budgetary process. Drawing on extensive original sources, the authors examine debates and reforms in public finance from Whitlam and Fraser to Hawke, Keating and Howard, and assess their impacts on policy development. In tracking the way governments actually spend money, Managing Public Expenditure in Australia provides an alternate and complementary political history of federal government over the past forty years.This book also includes accessible discussions on topics such as budget theory, financial management in government, and debt and deficit reduction. An explanation of new resource management techniques and initiatives help to illuminate the ongoing changes to budget and expenditure management practices. This is an essential purchase for students, teachers and practitioners of public finance, and for anyone involved in the continuing debate over the nature and role of the public sector.

The Reality of Budgetary Reform in OECD Nations investigates the impacts and consequences of budgetary reform through a comparative assessment of advanced Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) democracies that have undertaken budget reforms over the past two to three decades. This unique book traces the ?story of reform? in the respective countries. The expert authors explore the journey each country took, what the objectives were, the approach taken, the main events and key dates, what was implemented and what was discarded or replaced. They capture both the essence of each nation?s approach, as well as discuss the similarities and trends. The study investigates how the various roles of the central budget agencies have changed with respect to public expenditure, how budget processes have developed and the impact on the relations between key actors. It also analyses the internal cultures of central budget agencies and how they evaluate events, problems and their roles in controlling the fiscal policy of government.With its comparative focus, this timely book is essential reading for the OECD and World Bank affiliates. Likewise, scholars and researchers of public finance, international and comparative government, and development and public sector management should not be without this important resource.

Comparing Westminster explores how the governmental elites in Australia, Britain, Canada, New Zealand, and South Africa understand their Westminster system. It examines in detail four interrelated features of Westminster systems. Firstly, the increasing centralization in collective, responsible cabinet government. Second, the constitutional convention of ministerial and collective responsibility. Third, the role of a professional, non-partisan public service. And finally, parliament's relationship to the executive. The authors explain the changes that have occured in the Westminster model by analyzing four traditions: royal prerogative, responsible government, constitutional bureaucracy, and representative government. They suggest that each tradition has a recurring dilemma, between centralization and decentralization, party government and ministerial responsibility, professionalization and politicization, and finally elitism and participation. They gone on to argue that these dilemmas recur in four present-day debates: the growth of prime ministerial power, the decline in individual and collective ministerial accountability, politicisation of the public service, and executive dominance of the legislature.
Comparing Westminster concludes by identifying five meanings of--or narratives about--Westminster. Firstly, 'Westminster as heritage'--elite actors' shared governmental narrative understood as both precedents and nostalgia. Second, 'Westminster as political tool'--the expedient cloak worn by governments and politicians to defend themselves and criticize opponents. Third, 'Westminster as legitimising tradition'--providing legitimacy and a context for elite actions, serving as a point of reference to navigate this uncertain world. Fourth, 'Westminster as institutional category'--it remains a useful descriptor of a loose family of governments with shared origins and characteristics. Finally, 'Westminster as an effective political system'--it is a more effective and efficient political system than consensual parliamentary governments. Westminster is a flexible family of ideas that is useful for many purposes and survives, even thrives, because of its meaning in use to elite actors."

Comparing Westminster explores how the governmental elites in Australia, Britain, Canada, New Zealand, and South Africa understand their Westminster system. It examines in detail four interrelated features of Westminster systems. Firstly, the increasing centralization in collective, responsible cabinet government. Second, the constitutional convention of ministerial and collective responsibility. Third, the role of a professional, non-partisan public service. And finally, parliament's relationship to the executive. The authors explain the changes that have occured in the Westminster model by analyzing four traditions: royal prerogative, responsible government, constitutional bureaucracy, and representative government. They suggest that each tradition has a recurring dilemma, between centralization and decentralization, party government and ministerial responsibility, professionalization and politicization, and finally elitism and participation. They gone on to argue that these dilemmas recur in four present-day debates: the growth of prime ministerial power, the decline in individual and collective ministerial accountability, politicisation of the public service, and executive dominance of the legislature.
Comparing Westminster concludes by identifying five meanings of--or narratives about--Westminster. Firstly, 'Westminster as heritage'--elite actors' shared governmental narrative understood as both precedents and nostalgia. Second, 'Westminster as political tool'--the expedient cloak worn by governments and politicians to defend themselves and criticize opponents. Third, 'Westminster as legitimising tradition'--providing legitimacy and a context for elite actions, serving as a point of reference to navigate this uncertain world. Fourth, 'Westminster as institutional category'--it remains a useful descriptor of a loose family of governments with shared origins and characteristics. Finally, 'Westminster as an effective political system'--it is a more effective and efficient political system than consensual parliamentary governments. Westminster is a flexible family of ideas that is useful for many purposes and survives, even thrives, because of its meaning in use to elite actors."