This Thursday, the Ministers of the Economy and the Budget brought together a small group of personalities responsible for making proposals to better manage public finances and improve forecasts.
Never again. The poor forecasts for budgetary revenues for 2023 which led to the slippage of public finances, increasing the announced deficit from 4.4% to 6.1%, left a strong mark on the minds of Bercy. The new team formed by Antoine Armand, Minister of the Economy, and Laurent Saint-Martin, Minister of Public Accounts, therefore decided to form a “scientific committee” in order to establish a «plan d’action» so as not to repeat the misadventure of the previous government.
Its members, received this Thursday morning by the two ministers, will have to work on the one hand to “improve the quality of macroeconomic forecasts in an evolving context which could justify changes in method”we explain at Bercy, and on the other hand “improve budgetary monitoring and transparency, starting with representatives of Parliament”.
The committee is made up of eight personalities “a high level of expertise” : Laurent Bach, professor at Essec and member of the Institute of Public Policies, François Ecalle honorary senior advisor to the Court of Auditors and creator of the Fipeco site, Olivier Garnier, chief economist of the Banque de France, Camille Landais, president delegate of the Economic Analysis Council and teacher at the London School of Economics, Xavier Jaravel, professor at the London School of Economics, Valérie Plagnol, president of the Cercle des epargnants, Xavier Ragot, president of the OFCE, Ludovic Subran chief economist at Allianz, and Jean-Luc Tavernier, director general of INSEE.
Also read
Deficit slippage: how Bruno Le Maire defends himself by sparing Emmanuel Macron
“Complementary” work with the IGF
“This committee, it is specified, is one of the milestones of the work carried out by the services of the two ministries”. The General Inspectorate of Finance (IGF) has in fact already been tasked with understanding the reasons for the gap so deep (21 billion) between revenue forecasts and reality. According to her, most of this difference (80%) is due to unpredictable external factors (macroeconomics, behavior of stakeholders, etc.). Hence the mission of thinking about forecast models which was entrusted to the committee. “This work is complementary”we explain.
The other side – and undoubtedly the most politically important – is that of transparency. “Monitoring of State expenditure and revenue is ensured on a monthly basis and the LOLF (Organic Law relating to finance laws) provides for very extensive documentation”we recall. Faced with these “tens of thousands of pages produced each year”ministers wish to strengthen the “clarity” et “intelligibility” information. “The committee’s view will be interesting on this last point”we comment.
If it is not “in no way call into question the technical quality of Bercy’s services”the work will be carried out “without taboo” and the scientific committee “will have access to everything”including the calculation models which have been so lacking in forecasting budgetary revenues, we assure. The conclusions must be delivered in mid-December.
