More than 7 out of 10 members of the Hellenic Group of Economists argue that it is worthwhile to systematically evaluate parties’ electoral programs in terms of their value and applicability by an independent fiscal body (for example, the Budget Office of the Parliament).

One of the important problems of the functioning and quality of democracy, highlighted by the crisis of the previous decade, is the impossibility of a reliable assessment by voters of election programs in general and individual election promises of the party. This deficit, exacerbated by the lack of teaching even basic economics as a stand-alone subject in compulsory education, allows or even encourages bidding on election promises that cannot be kept or that would incur significant collective costs.

The proposal for the evaluation of the electoral programs of parties by one of the already existing fiscal bodies follows the example of the established evaluation of the consequences of individual bills submitted to Parliament, both with the obligation to submit an analysis of the consequences of regulation by the urgent ministries, as well as with the report on estimated costs for the budget from the General Accounting Office of the State.

Of course, it should be noted that although the analysis of the consequences and costs of legislation has significantly increased transparency and accountability on the part of legislators, in practice, as the Center for Humanitarian Studies Legislation Quality Index shows, this analysis often does not have significant content, either intentionally or due to the objective impossibility predictions.

A total of 30 Greek economists responded to the Panel’s April question. Of these, 76% consider it expedient to conduct an independent evaluation of election programs, while 20% believe the opposite. 3% of respondents stopped between two options.

In their comments, which are fully available on the website of the Center for Liberal Studies, members of the Hellenic Panel of Economists note the usefulness of such an independent assessment, as it would help citizens assess whether parties’ campaign promises are realistic, and this will help counter the widespread belief that the implementation policy is primarily a matter of “political will” regardless of fiscal data.

On the other hand, it is argued that such an assessment is impossible and in no case can be applied to party programs aimed at radical change. Moreover, this perspective highlights the lack of confidence in independent bodies that would undertake such an undertaking, and the fact that even with simpler valuations, there is rarely unanimity between valuators, even if they are objective in their valuations. their judgments.

However, in any case, and regardless of the individual position on this issue, it is emphasized the need for further staffing of bodies such as the Parliamentary Budget Office with specialized personnel so that they can carry out their work without hindrance, but also the need for the parties themselves to begin to represent, even if on a voluntary basis, documented cost estimates for their campaign programs.

* Mr. Giorgos Archondas is a member of the Scientific Council of the Center for Humanitarian Studies and the head of the Hellenic Group of Economists.

The Greek Economists Group is an initiative of the Center for Humanitarian Studies that aims to record and report on the voices of leading Greek women and Greek economists on critical economic policy issues. The panel is attended by 75 economists from 59 universities and institutions in 11 countries. For a detailed list of participants, their responses to monthly questions and explanatory comments, as well as answers to frequently asked questions about the Panel, please visit the Center for Humanitarian Studies website kefim.org.