The BfC hasincreased by 78.6 percent from Rs. 187 bn in 2012 to Rs. 334 bn in 2015. Table 1.4.1 illustrates the BfC as a share of the Total National Expenditure (TNE) and GDP which has increased during the period under study. There is a drop in the share of the TNE in 2015 BE due to a drop in the shares for education and health, although the projections for 2017 indicate a rise
Sri Lanka spends 8‐10 percent of the TNE and 6‐7 percent of the national GDP on the provision of services to children. A substantial portion (>50 percent) of the BfC comprises of the health budget. Due to the difficulty in extracting child specific investments, the total health budget has been considered. Nevertheless, it can be reasonably estimated that the public investment in children amounts to approximately 10 percent of the TNE. This is justified by taking into account both the direct and indirect public investments in children that have not been considered in this study due to the difficulty in extracting information from the budget estimates including investments made by the Ministry of Social Services (MoSS), Ministry of Justice (MoJ), the Department of Police, Ministry of Labour (MoL) and Ministry of Economic Development (MoED),
Ensuring the use of funds for child specific programmes and the efficiency of resource management are challenges for the GoSL.
Recurrent Expenditure has a CAGR of 11.14 percent between 2012‐2015 and Capital Expenditure has a CAGR of 32.13 percent during the same period. However, the ratio of recurrent to capital expenditure is high. In 2015, Recurrent Expenditure was 2.38 times as much as Capital Expenditure. In 2012, Recurrent Expenditure was 4.76 times as much as Capital Expenditure. Note that recurrent investments8 are far greater than capital investments
Overall, the fund utilization is at an optimum level in all sectors when considering the years 2012 and 2013, although there is overspending on Recurrent Expenditure with an under‐utilization of Capital investments. This requires attention given the inclusion of a considerable allocation for programme implementation, improving physical resources and enhancing the capacity of service providers in the Capital Budget. The delay in fund disbursement can be identified as a cause for this issue resulting in the inability to implement planned programmes.