Wednesday, February 26, 2025
Wednesday, July 4, 2007
Regional Feedback Workshop on D&D
Regional Feedback Workshop on
Decentralization and De-concentration Reforms
14th March, 2007
Kratie, Cambodia
The Workshop Report:
by
Sreng Kimsrun, NGO Liaison Office Program Coordinator
Organized by
NGO Liaison Office
Commune Council Support Project
[NLO-CCSP]
Facilitated by
KAFDOC and CED
I. Introduction
In June 2005, the Royal Government of Cambodia [RGC] adopted the Strategic Framework for Decentralization and Deconcentration Reforms [D&D Strategy], which among others, also commits to promote greater civil society participation in local governance processes. Its basic principles call for promotion of citizen involvement in the planning, delivery and monitoring of basic social services and people’s oversight mechanisms to promote transparency and accountability. This is a new phenomenon in the Cambodian civil society landscape.
Commune Council Support Project [CCSP], under the mandate from the Royal Government has set up and manages the NGO Liaison Office [NLO] within the Ministry of Interior at DOLA [Department of Local Administration] building. The NLO aims to enhance the exchange and flow of communications between the government and civil society on matters relating to decentralization and local governance. It also aims to promote greater partnership between civil society organizations and the government at all levels.
NLO serves as a mechanism to bring NGO inputs and recommendations on the implementation of decentralization and on proposed plans and policies, and also bring back government response to NGO recommendations to the NGO community; thus promoting a continuous and healthy exchange of ideas.
For this to realize, among other activities, a series of regional feedback workshops at key regional centers are planned to gather feedback from Civil Society Organizations [CSOs] working in the countryside. The first regional feedback workshop was organized at Kratie province to cover the North-East area of the country like Kratie, Mondulkiri, Stung Streng, Kampong Cham and Ratanakiri provinces.
The participants were focal NGO partners of CCSP from Kratie, and Kg. Cham; three community based organizations [CBOs]/community organizations [COs] from Kratie; three NGOs from each of 5 provinces; one Commune council representative from each provinces; a head of PLAU or his/her representative from each provinces; head of provincial Rural development department and provincial Economy and Finance department from each of 5 provinces, one official from DoLA of Interior, and three CCSP staff . There were altogether 39 participants in the workshop.
II. Objective
The objective of the regional level feedback workshop was to solicit NGO inputs, lesson learnt and recommendations on the implementation of decentralization policies and feedback to DOLA-MOI and NCDD [National Committee for the Management of Decentralization and De-concentration Reforms].
III. Expected outputs
1. DoLA/MoI and/or NCDD received civil society feedback, concerns and recommendations on D&D;
2. I/NGOs, CSOs and sector departments provided forum and opportunities to exchange and learn experiences from one another;
3. The relationship and networking between NLO-CCSP and I/NGOs and CSOs in North-East area of the country strengthened.
IV. Methodology
Following a brief opening ceremony and presentation session and plenary discussion, participants were divided into 3 groups, each group consisting of a mix of participants representing NGOs, provincial line officials and commune councilors. Each group was provided the template as sample and flip chart for writing down the result of the discussion as shown in Annex II.
Based on the participants’ experience and observation of implementation of D&D reforms policies at the sub-national level, participants discussed and provided inputs and recommendations/suggestions on the following topics:
Problems and obstacles of using commune fund ;
Problems and obstacles of using sectoral allocation;
Process of preparation the 3-years-rolling development plan and annual commune development plan;
Review of several legal documents (policy, law, Prakas, regulations, guidelines) in relation to their implication on effective decentralization implementation
After the discussion, each group presented the result in plenary followed by Question and Answer session.
V. The Work shop
A brief opening ceremony was organized. The ceremony was presided by the Vice-governor of Kratie province, H.E. Nithean Sarau. In his opening speech, he highlighted major concerns and suggested areas of consultation among all three stakeholders. He appreciated the holding of such feedback workshop and said the outcome of the workshop will be fruitful to sub-national authorities to improve their functioning. The representative from the Ministry of Interior Mr. Uy Sakun made detailed presentation on progresses made on D&D reforms and informed participants of upcoming programs of the central government. At the closing, the Deputy Chief of PLAU, Mr. Lang Mang presented the summary of the workshop with closing remarks.
VI. Result of Group Discussion
The outcomes of the group discussion and the plenary presentation and discussion are consolidated as follows:
Question
Obstacles/Main issues
Solution (in the past)
Recommendations/Suggestions
Other
1. Problems and obstacles of using commune fund?
· Budget flow was late/slow (group 1) (group 3)
· When drawing money, the commission (percentage) was asked for by treasury officials. (group 1) (group 2)
· Capacities of CCs still limited/low (group 1) (group 2)
· The quality of project was lack as the staff took commission/ percentage from it, before, but now no more. (group 1)
· Too many financial forms /documents for CCs (group 1)
· Administration fund was too small (group 2)
· No invoice at commune (group 2)
· Each CCs worked not smoothly one another(group 3)
· Gave them, if not it was stuck, or delay to the other day (group 1)
· CCs were assisted by provincial treasury (group 1)
· Take strongly actions to crack down the % or commission (group 1)
· Increase the CC’s capacity (group 1)
· CCs can get taxes in the commune by divided what/mow many % by commune, by department, and by province. (group 1) (group 2) (group 3)
· to have the capable CCs, if the CCs election system was change to by voting candidates. (group 2)
· More Training to CCs on Finance (group 3)
· Commune should seek more donors itself (group 3)
· CCs should follow/obey the role and tasks assigned by the law and take action or make decision based on the administrative system (group 3)
· CCs should have more and clear dissemination about theirs projects (group 3)
2. Problems and obstacles of using fund allocation of sector/departments
· Many trainings but not so related to the real implementation (group 1)
· Budget flow was being slow/late (group 1)
· The expenditure at the high land (MKR) are far difference from other area, e.g. Take out the land is more difficult then fill in. (group 1)
· small budget for Sector department to support C (group 2)
· Some communes prepare the plan with no inform the villagers (group 3)
· CCs did not know about sector department allocation (group 3)
· the project of sector support not so fit with CCs project (group 3)
· Learning by doing (group 1)
· The training should be more clear and related to the real implementation (group 1)
· Should have only one administration procedure (group 1)
· Sector department should have more budget, and govt. should not depend on only the donors, and the govt. should hold the capital strictly. (group 2)
· Govt. should cut down the corruption (group 2)
· Should have more info dissemination (group 3)
· CCs should have relationship with sector departments (group 3)
3. Problems and obstacles of Process of preparation the 3 –year-rolling plan and commune development plan process?
· Not many people known/understood about project of CCs (group 1)
· The participation from CCs and villagers was still limited, not so active with the project (group 1) (group 3)
· The participation form villagers were limited/ a few (group 2)
· villagers did not depth understanding on priority tasks (group 2)
· Did not seek the reasonable season of farmers/cultivators (group 2)
· Too many Commune projects and too small budget (group 3)
· Participated with difficulty (group 1) (group2) (group 3)
· Strengthening the participation of villagers in term of labor and spirit plus their contributions (money) (group 1)
· CCs should have more meeting or discussions with sector(department of planning, MRD, etc.) and NGOs
· Should have more Participation from all involved institutions. (group 1) (group 3)
· Increase the participation of villagers (group 2) (group 3)
· CCs should not skip any steps of CIP (group 2)
· More dissemination info/CIP interests through TV, radio (group 2) (group 3)
· Development partners should discuss more with CCs (group 3)
· CCs should seek only the project that responds to the villager need. (group 3)
4. Review of legal documents (policy, law, Prakas, regulations, guidelines) in relation to their implication on effective decentralization implementation
· Capacities of CCs still limited/low, how about with law term? (group 1)
· Legal documents, documents, and others usually are at the clerk’s home, not at commune office. (group 1)
· not enough table and document equipments (group 1)
· CCs have to ask for permission from authority when they want to attend any workshops or any other activities of civil society- Guideline # 010 (group 1)
· D&D is new for CCs and others (group 2)
· all law is too new and too many for CCs (group 3)
NGOs used to explain or support to CCs (group2) (group 3)
· Adjust the guideline #010 to no need to ask for permission from authority (group 1) (group 3)
· Should try to use the simple word/paragraph (group 2)
· Not only the govt., but also NGOs/COs should help to disseminate information and support to villagers in their target area, at least. (group 3)
ANNEXES
ANNEX I: Opening Speech of the vice governor of Kratie province (in Khmer version)
ANNEX II: Instruction and sample for group discussion (in English and Khmer version)
Group discussion
Instruction:
Each group, based on your experience in the implementation, please discuss and find out the main obstacles, issues, good lesson learnt, and raise the recommendations or suggestions to solve the issues/problems on the following topics below:
Problems and obstacles of using commune fund ;
Problems and obstacles of using pectoral allocation;
Process of preparation the 3-years-rolling development plan and Annual commune development plan;
Review of several legal documents (policy, law, Prakas, regulations, guidelines) in relation to their implication on effective decentralization implementation
Sample Table:
Decentralization and De-concentration Reforms
14th March, 2007
Kratie, Cambodia
The Workshop Report:
by
Sreng Kimsrun, NGO Liaison Office Program Coordinator
Organized by
NGO Liaison Office
Commune Council Support Project
[NLO-CCSP]
Facilitated by
KAFDOC and CED
I. Introduction
In June 2005, the Royal Government of Cambodia [RGC] adopted the Strategic Framework for Decentralization and Deconcentration Reforms [D&D Strategy], which among others, also commits to promote greater civil society participation in local governance processes. Its basic principles call for promotion of citizen involvement in the planning, delivery and monitoring of basic social services and people’s oversight mechanisms to promote transparency and accountability. This is a new phenomenon in the Cambodian civil society landscape.
Commune Council Support Project [CCSP], under the mandate from the Royal Government has set up and manages the NGO Liaison Office [NLO] within the Ministry of Interior at DOLA [Department of Local Administration] building. The NLO aims to enhance the exchange and flow of communications between the government and civil society on matters relating to decentralization and local governance. It also aims to promote greater partnership between civil society organizations and the government at all levels.
NLO serves as a mechanism to bring NGO inputs and recommendations on the implementation of decentralization and on proposed plans and policies, and also bring back government response to NGO recommendations to the NGO community; thus promoting a continuous and healthy exchange of ideas.
For this to realize, among other activities, a series of regional feedback workshops at key regional centers are planned to gather feedback from Civil Society Organizations [CSOs] working in the countryside. The first regional feedback workshop was organized at Kratie province to cover the North-East area of the country like Kratie, Mondulkiri, Stung Streng, Kampong Cham and Ratanakiri provinces.
The participants were focal NGO partners of CCSP from Kratie, and Kg. Cham; three community based organizations [CBOs]/community organizations [COs] from Kratie; three NGOs from each of 5 provinces; one Commune council representative from each provinces; a head of PLAU or his/her representative from each provinces; head of provincial Rural development department and provincial Economy and Finance department from each of 5 provinces, one official from DoLA of Interior, and three CCSP staff . There were altogether 39 participants in the workshop.
II. Objective
The objective of the regional level feedback workshop was to solicit NGO inputs, lesson learnt and recommendations on the implementation of decentralization policies and feedback to DOLA-MOI and NCDD [National Committee for the Management of Decentralization and De-concentration Reforms].
III. Expected outputs
1. DoLA/MoI and/or NCDD received civil society feedback, concerns and recommendations on D&D;
2. I/NGOs, CSOs and sector departments provided forum and opportunities to exchange and learn experiences from one another;
3. The relationship and networking between NLO-CCSP and I/NGOs and CSOs in North-East area of the country strengthened.
IV. Methodology
Following a brief opening ceremony and presentation session and plenary discussion, participants were divided into 3 groups, each group consisting of a mix of participants representing NGOs, provincial line officials and commune councilors. Each group was provided the template as sample and flip chart for writing down the result of the discussion as shown in Annex II.
Based on the participants’ experience and observation of implementation of D&D reforms policies at the sub-national level, participants discussed and provided inputs and recommendations/suggestions on the following topics:
Problems and obstacles of using commune fund ;
Problems and obstacles of using sectoral allocation;
Process of preparation the 3-years-rolling development plan and annual commune development plan;
Review of several legal documents (policy, law, Prakas, regulations, guidelines) in relation to their implication on effective decentralization implementation
After the discussion, each group presented the result in plenary followed by Question and Answer session.
V. The Work shop
A brief opening ceremony was organized. The ceremony was presided by the Vice-governor of Kratie province, H.E. Nithean Sarau. In his opening speech, he highlighted major concerns and suggested areas of consultation among all three stakeholders. He appreciated the holding of such feedback workshop and said the outcome of the workshop will be fruitful to sub-national authorities to improve their functioning. The representative from the Ministry of Interior Mr. Uy Sakun made detailed presentation on progresses made on D&D reforms and informed participants of upcoming programs of the central government. At the closing, the Deputy Chief of PLAU, Mr. Lang Mang presented the summary of the workshop with closing remarks.
VI. Result of Group Discussion
The outcomes of the group discussion and the plenary presentation and discussion are consolidated as follows:
Question
Obstacles/Main issues
Solution (in the past)
Recommendations/Suggestions
Other
1. Problems and obstacles of using commune fund?
· Budget flow was late/slow (group 1) (group 3)
· When drawing money, the commission (percentage) was asked for by treasury officials. (group 1) (group 2)
· Capacities of CCs still limited/low (group 1) (group 2)
· The quality of project was lack as the staff took commission/ percentage from it, before, but now no more. (group 1)
· Too many financial forms /documents for CCs (group 1)
· Administration fund was too small (group 2)
· No invoice at commune (group 2)
· Each CCs worked not smoothly one another(group 3)
· Gave them, if not it was stuck, or delay to the other day (group 1)
· CCs were assisted by provincial treasury (group 1)
· Take strongly actions to crack down the % or commission (group 1)
· Increase the CC’s capacity (group 1)
· CCs can get taxes in the commune by divided what/mow many % by commune, by department, and by province. (group 1) (group 2) (group 3)
· to have the capable CCs, if the CCs election system was change to by voting candidates. (group 2)
· More Training to CCs on Finance (group 3)
· Commune should seek more donors itself (group 3)
· CCs should follow/obey the role and tasks assigned by the law and take action or make decision based on the administrative system (group 3)
· CCs should have more and clear dissemination about theirs projects (group 3)
2. Problems and obstacles of using fund allocation of sector/departments
· Many trainings but not so related to the real implementation (group 1)
· Budget flow was being slow/late (group 1)
· The expenditure at the high land (MKR) are far difference from other area, e.g. Take out the land is more difficult then fill in. (group 1)
· small budget for Sector department to support C (group 2)
· Some communes prepare the plan with no inform the villagers (group 3)
· CCs did not know about sector department allocation (group 3)
· the project of sector support not so fit with CCs project (group 3)
· Learning by doing (group 1)
· The training should be more clear and related to the real implementation (group 1)
· Should have only one administration procedure (group 1)
· Sector department should have more budget, and govt. should not depend on only the donors, and the govt. should hold the capital strictly. (group 2)
· Govt. should cut down the corruption (group 2)
· Should have more info dissemination (group 3)
· CCs should have relationship with sector departments (group 3)
3. Problems and obstacles of Process of preparation the 3 –year-rolling plan and commune development plan process?
· Not many people known/understood about project of CCs (group 1)
· The participation from CCs and villagers was still limited, not so active with the project (group 1) (group 3)
· The participation form villagers were limited/ a few (group 2)
· villagers did not depth understanding on priority tasks (group 2)
· Did not seek the reasonable season of farmers/cultivators (group 2)
· Too many Commune projects and too small budget (group 3)
· Participated with difficulty (group 1) (group2) (group 3)
· Strengthening the participation of villagers in term of labor and spirit plus their contributions (money) (group 1)
· CCs should have more meeting or discussions with sector(department of planning, MRD, etc.) and NGOs
· Should have more Participation from all involved institutions. (group 1) (group 3)
· Increase the participation of villagers (group 2) (group 3)
· CCs should not skip any steps of CIP (group 2)
· More dissemination info/CIP interests through TV, radio (group 2) (group 3)
· Development partners should discuss more with CCs (group 3)
· CCs should seek only the project that responds to the villager need. (group 3)
4. Review of legal documents (policy, law, Prakas, regulations, guidelines) in relation to their implication on effective decentralization implementation
· Capacities of CCs still limited/low, how about with law term? (group 1)
· Legal documents, documents, and others usually are at the clerk’s home, not at commune office. (group 1)
· not enough table and document equipments (group 1)
· CCs have to ask for permission from authority when they want to attend any workshops or any other activities of civil society- Guideline # 010 (group 1)
· D&D is new for CCs and others (group 2)
· all law is too new and too many for CCs (group 3)
NGOs used to explain or support to CCs (group2) (group 3)
· Adjust the guideline #010 to no need to ask for permission from authority (group 1) (group 3)
· Should try to use the simple word/paragraph (group 2)
· Not only the govt., but also NGOs/COs should help to disseminate information and support to villagers in their target area, at least. (group 3)
ANNEXES
ANNEX I: Opening Speech of the vice governor of Kratie province (in Khmer version)
ANNEX II: Instruction and sample for group discussion (in English and Khmer version)
Group discussion
Instruction:
Each group, based on your experience in the implementation, please discuss and find out the main obstacles, issues, good lesson learnt, and raise the recommendations or suggestions to solve the issues/problems on the following topics below:
Problems and obstacles of using commune fund ;
Problems and obstacles of using pectoral allocation;
Process of preparation the 3-years-rolling development plan and Annual commune development plan;
Review of several legal documents (policy, law, Prakas, regulations, guidelines) in relation to their implication on effective decentralization implementation
Sample Table:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
