Debt Management Performance Assessment : Kingdom of Lesotho
At the request of the Minister of Finance of Lesotho, a joint World Bank -Macroeconomic and Financial Management Institute of Eastern and Southern Africa (MEFMI) mission visited Maseru, between July 2 to 6, 2018, to undertake a Debt Management Perf...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Report |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2020
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/919621578588194124/Debt-Management-Performance-Assessment-DeMPA-Lesotho http://hdl.handle.net/10986/33217 |
| Summary: | At the request of the Minister of
Finance of Lesotho, a joint World Bank -Macroeconomic and
Financial Management Institute of Eastern and Southern
Africa (MEFMI) mission visited Maseru, between July 2 to 6,
2018, to undertake a Debt Management Performance Assessment
(DeMPA).The objective of the mission was to evaluate current
performance against the DeMPA methodology, and to assess
progress since 2012, when the first DeMPA was performed.The
results of the evaluation, spanning the full range of debt
management (DeM) functions, show limited progress. Compared
to the previous DeMPA, the current assessment revealed only
one upgrade related to the registry and management system
for domestic debt of the CBL. Yet, additional actions to
improve debt management in Lesotho are currently under
discussion (i.e., approval of a new policy framework and
public debt law), or have already started such as the
publication of a debt statistical bulletin, undertaking of a
Medium-Term Debt Strategy (MTDS) analytical exercise as the
foundation for a Debt Management Strategy, and introduction
of a Cash Management Unit.The assessment also revealed
several downgrades associated to weaknesses in debt
reporting to parliament, lack of regular information sharing
between MoF - CBL and with market participants, as well as
lack of secure storage and backup for the debt recording and
management system of the MoF. Additional areas of
improvement relate to, among others: i) fragmented legal
framework; ii) lack of a loan guarantees’ framework; iii)
preparation and approval of a formal Debt Management
Strategy; iv) weak quality controls for data publication; v)
quality of cash flow forecasts; vi) lack of policies and
procedures for DeM operations; and, vii) completeness and
timeliness of debt records. |
|---|