‘The reaction of the administration to the findings by COA is quite indicative of their overall attitude towards checks and balances–they are not to be questioned in any manner, shape or form.’
THE hissy fit thrown by officials of the Duterte administration (and the President himself) is ludicrous but unsurprising. It’s exactly the sort of behavior we would expect from one whose hand was caught inside the cookie jar. As none of these folks are new to government service, I am certain that they know exactly what the mandate of the Commission of Audit is, and what its processes are. These outbursts are nothing more than an attempt to solicit sympathy from the public. As they say, if you do not have the facts, then you pound on the table to distract.
For starters, every government department, agency, or bureau is audited by COA. While the annual audit report (as the name suggests) is released yearly, the process is actually a back-and-forth with your agency’s resident auditor. Disbursement and other supporting documents are regularly submitted to the resident auditor, especially if an audit observation memo is issued. There are many opportunities for an agency or department to provide supporting documents, and usually there is an exit conference prior to the posting of the AAR. You can take a look for yourself, as AARs are found on COA’s website, as this has been the practice for many years now.
You’ll also find that there is a corresponding “management response” to the observations listed, which is evidence that the agency or office being audited has been given the chance to provide its replies. The current AAR also references unresolved observations from previous years, if any, making these easy to track. Let us also remember that admin and finance teams of departments and agencies did not come down from yesterday’s shower of rain; most of them are career bureaucrats who know these processes inside and out from long years of experience. I’m quite certain that these folks are likewise cringing at the overly dramatic protestations of their bosses but will never utter these sentiments out loud for fear of reprisal.
I do agree that while the reported observations of COA sound especially egregious in light of the poor pandemic response of government, the COA did not apportion any blame or criminal intent in these findings. As pointed out by COA Chair Michael Aguinaldo, the Commission “observes and recommends” actions to be taken to correct these deficiencies.
In my research for this piece, I have yet to find any confirmation that a dreaded Notice of Disallowance in relation to the DOH expenditures in question, which means that the DOH still has the opportunity to keep providing supporting documents, even for the next year’s audit report.
This cavalier attitude is especially grating and all the more flagrant given that people have been clamoring for a better response to the COVID-19 pandemic from our executives.
These observations seem extraordinarily wasteful given that “we are short on funds” seems to be the favorite refrain of officials whenever government support is required; case in point, people have been bemoaning the lack of an effective contract tracing system, only to find out (again, courtesy of COA) that the Department of Interior and Local Government failed to utilize a substantial portion of the funds allocated for that very purpose.
Meanwhile, back in March, the DILG was all over the place in asking for more funds.
The reaction of the administration to the findings by COA is quite indicative of their overall attitude towards checks and balances–they are not to be questioned in any manner, shape or form. They seem to forget–or they just do not care for–the time-honored principle that public service is a public trust, and part of that trust is ensuring that all public funds under your care are to be spent judiciously and prudently. These funds come from the taxes of every contributing Filipino–be it a laborer, fast food employee, or corporate CEO.
