The Finance Committee of the National Assembly defends its approach November 5, 2026

Faced with the questions raised by the Ministry of the Economy, Finance and Planning on the procedure for examining the initial finance bill (PLFI) 2027, the president of the Finance and Budgetary Control Commission of the National Assembly Alphonse Mané Sambou provides details. In a press release, he notably justifies his request for withdrawal of the text, refutes any contradiction in parliamentary procedure and rejects accusations of obstructionist maneuvers.

The disagreement between the Ministry of Economy, Finance and Planning (MEFP) and the Finance and Budgetary Control Committee of the National Assembly around the examination of the 2027 initial finance bill (PLFI) is taking a new turn. In a press release, the chairman of the said committee intends to provide clarification on the circumstances leading to his request for withdrawal of the text and on the timetable of parliamentary work.

At the heart of this controversy is the rejection, on Tuesday, November 3, 2026, by the National Assembly, of the amending finance bill for the year 2026 (PLFR 2026). Following this vote, the president of the Finance Commission claims to have contacted the Minister of the Economy, Finance and Planning to suggest the withdrawal of the PLFI 2027. An approach that he presents as part of a “concern for institutional dialogue with the aim of facilitating the adoption of the text”.

According to him, the problem lies in the macroeconomic and budgetary bases of the 2027 draft budget. The forecasts in terms of revenue, expenditure, deficit and financing needs would be based on the hypotheses and figures of the 2026 PLFR, however rejected by the deputies. The president of the commission therefore considers that these data are no longer in line with the legal order.

He also notes a paradox in the government’s approach: “developing a draft finance law for the year 2027 (PLFI 2027) taking as a reference base a draft amending finance law from the previous year (PLFR 2026) while the National Assembly had not yet ruled on the latter”. He specifies, however, that his suggestion does not bind the government, which remains free to withdraw or maintain its text, while the National Assembly retains the prerogative to draw the consequences.

A parliamentary procedure defended

On the alleged contradiction between the request for withdrawal of the PLFI 2027 and the convening of the Finance Commission, the president sweeps away any ambiguity. He recalls that the withdrawal request is optional and that the National Assembly remains required to examine the finance bill within 60 days of its submission, in accordance with article 68 of the Constitution.

Entering the PLFI 2027 since October 12, 2026, the parliamentary institution would thus only have a little more than a month to conduct the examination of the budget. Under these conditions, the committee decided to start its work in accordance with the programming resulting from the Conference of Presidents, on the basis of the sole finance bill before it.

The press release also returns to the regularity of the convening of the commission. On November 3, the President of the National Assembly convened the Conference of Presidents in order to set the schedule for the extended meetings of the Finance and Budgetary Control Committee devoted to the examination of the PLFI 2027. A meeting attended by the Minister of Communication and Relations with Institutions, government spokesperson, Bacary Sarr, representing the Executive.

Dismissal of obstruction charges

For the chairman of the Finance Committee, this presence responds to the government’s need for information on the calendar and agenda of parliamentary work. He affirms that the Executive had been informed 48 hours before the start of the commissions’ work. He therefore considers it “ill-founded” to speak of non-compliance with deadlines.

He also attributes the controversy to a slight delay in the physical delivery of the summons, specifying that in the absence of litigation, the timetable was readjusted. The committee meeting is therefore set for Saturday November 7, 2026.

Another sticking point: accusations of budgetary obstructionism. On this issue, the president of the Finance Commission deplores the remarks that he considers “derogatory and discourteous” from the Minister of Economy, Finance and Planning towards the national representation. He considers that these statements would be linked to the rejection of the amending finance bill for 2026, for which he attributes responsibility to the lack of transparency of the budget document submitted for examination by the deputies.

YEAR