century. Follow the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline and if you look you will see that sensors are installed everywhere along landslide prone hill slopes which automatically transmit information to the command centre if landslide movement is detected, even in millimetres. However, in the capital city of Georgia, we do not have these things. Why? Do we lack the money? City Hall cannot spend its money. GEL 140 million has not been spent and has been moved to the balance."

verified the accuracy of the statement.

Tbilisi’s budget has recently been the subject of high public interest and discussion on multiple occasions. The bulk of the questions are directed toward shortcomings in the absorption of already approved assignments. As illustrated by Graph 1, throughout the whole of 2014 the use of allocated funds usually lagged behind the respective plan at the end of all four quarters.

 Expenditures 2014 (GEL Thousand)

This trend continued to exist in the first two quarters of 2015. The amount of absorbed monetary means for the first six months of 2015 equals GEL 426 million which is 88.2% of the total assignments envisaged in the plan. Therefore, in the part of expenditures, there is a GEL 57 million gap in the planned amount.

The indicators of the fulfilment of expenditure part of the Tbilisi budget according to priorities are given in Table 1.

 Report on Fulfilment of Months I-VI of Tbilisi Budget for 2015

In regard to the balance of deposit accounts, according to the Budgetary Code of Georgia a balance is "a monetary means available in the accounts of relevant budgets for the corresponding period." The second graph demonstrates the balance of the Tbilisi budget at the beginning of each month throughout 2014. As illustrated by the graph, the balance of the budget account reached GEL 50.5 million at the beginning of 2014 whilst the maximum amount was registered at the end of June 2014 when the total amount of accumulated monetary means (balance) exceeded GEL 123 million. This fact was caused by the GEL 45 million gap in terms of planned expenditures, on the one hand, and by the excessive income of the budget by GEL 25.5 million, on the other. However, in the course of July 2014 the balance decreased drastically and fell to GEL 55.56 million whilst at the end of December it rose to GEL 68 million.

 Balance in Deposit Accounts at Month Start (GEL Thousand)

After the continuous decrease throughout the first quarter of 2015, the amount of monetary means accumulated in budgetary accounts as a balance at the beginning of April reached GEL 45.1 million. However, in the second quarter the balance rose by GEL 55.4 million and equalled GEL 100.5 million at the end of June. As a result, instead of a decrease of GEL 46.4 million as envisaged by the plan, the balance increased by GEL 32.4 million as compared to the beginning of 2015.

As illustrated by the budget fulfilment reports, the shared characteristics of the previous year and the first two quarters of 2015 comprise a surplus fulfilment of incomes, on the one hand, and a shortfall in the expenditures plan, on the other hand. Perhaps, the surplus amount of income together with the decrease in the amount of cash-fulfilled expenditures (as compared to the plan) causes the positive change. However, of note is the fact that "liberated" monetary means equals incomplete or slowly completed projects.

As illustrated by the budget fulfilment reports for 2014 and the first six months of 2015, there has been a constant lagging behind in the expenditures part of the Tbilisi budget from the beginning of January 2014 to June 2015. The 2014 budget had a 93% fulfilment rate in the expenditures part. This trend remained the same throughout the first two quarters of 2015; only 88.2% of planned assignments have been absorbed in the first six months of the year. In regard to the balance accumulated in the accounts of the Tbilisi budget, it has never reached GEL 140 million, including the latest data of July 2015. The maximum amount of the balance was registered at the end of June 2014 when it reached GEL 132 million. Therefore, Aleksandre Elisashvili rightfully pointed out the shortcomings with regard to the absorption of assignments as envisaged by the budget but his number for the amount of the balance in the accounts of the Tbilisi budget was inaccurate.