DESPITE Camarines Sur’s (CamSur) advertisements of prolific tourism generation, in government accounting and macroeconomics, one of the most insidious that perpetuates poverty is plunder.
That poverty afflicts CamSur is undeniable. Plunder creates deficits when revenues cannot cover expenditures. This applies to the country’s gross domestic productivity (GDP) as well as the gross regional domestic productivity (GRDP) of local government units (LGU).
One of the critical indicators of GRDP is its contribution to GDP where the statistic tells us whether, on a comparative basis, an LGU adds productively or weighs down development.
While expenses increase domestic productivity as the output formula is expenditure-based, non-productive expenditures eventually take their toll as the lack of absorptive synergies and multipliers fail to produce sustained productivity.
One of the lowest recorded contributors to GDP is CamSur. That validates its 38.7- percent poverty incidence index. It is explained by a Commission on Audit (COA) report where, among other adverse findings, “collections in the Camarines Sur Water Sports Complex were not turned over to the treasurer/cashier within the period stated under Sections 15 and 32 of the Manual on New Government accounting System, Vol. 1, thus exposing government funds to possible loss, misuse or misappropriation.”
Note those last words. On the expenditure end, auditors discovered unliquidated advances to local officials that “raised doubts on whether the purpose of these cash advances has been served.” Notably, P6.71 million was paid out without public bidding, and “salaries and wages were not directly paid to persons named in the payroll.” These uncollected advances eventually bloated by 92.0 percent.
By pillaging revenues and bloating expenses, deficits form. Hence more than one of every three is poor. Despite the advertising, the real CamSur is the backwater poverty that corruption inflicts on its constituencies.
Let us conduct a forensic analysis. Culling from the latest COA audit results, let us apply economic output as a measure.
Within CamSur’s consolidated statement of revenues and expenses, we find a dependence on internal revenue allotments (IRA) ranging from 63 percent to 88.5 percent. Net out the IRA and CamSur’s bottom line turns negative. Its deficit is P585.87 million—an amount larger than its net income when IRA is included.
On its expenditures column, the province reduced critical inputs yet increased questionable non-essentials. For instance, cash gifts increased by as much as 202.40 percent and honoraria grew by as much as 723,000 percent. Yes, it’s in the thousands percent.
Internet expenses increased by 56.8 percent, advertising by 59.7 percent, contributions by 225.4 percent and consultancies by 262.9 percent. However, there were drastic reductions in critical expenditures. Personnel benefits fell by 89.5 percent, contractual wages by 35.4 percent and subsistence allowances by 19 percent. Contrast the waning concern for human resources against an increase in animal and zoological supplies of 209.1 percent.
It’s a question of priorities. While CamSur’s GRDP driver is its agricultural and fisheries sector, note its preoccupation with non-economic drivers. A province constantly afflicted with calamitous flooding, curiously, its expenditures for the maintenance of irrigation, canals and laterals fell by as much as 497,554 percent. Again, the hundred thousands percent. No wonder Camarinenses drown and die when the rains come.
Add to this, CamSur’s fatal trade-offs. Expenditures for agricultural, fishery and forestry equipment fell by 45.6 percent against expenditures for recreational watercraft that bloated by 62.8 percent.
This preoccupation with tourism that contributes little to its GRDP is likewise evident in Cam Sur’s balance sheet. On its assets column, critical reforestation is virtually stagnant, increasing only by a negligible 4.1 percent.
Financial and fiscal governance is virtually non-existent. Total uncollected receivables bloated by 1,162.0 percent. Unliquidated advances and receivables from provincial officers and employees bloated by 92.0 percent and collectibles from its LGUs representing unremitted real-property taxes bloated by 437.4 percent.
These reports of extraneous costs over unremitted earnings correlate to the recent P104.5-million plunder charges applied against errant executives and their complicit family members. What insidious modus was reflected in the financials, the Ombudsman charges and the COA findings are mirrored repeatedly under the plunder charges.
The accusations include a charge that over P18.9 million was remunerated to a private foundation allegedly owned by local officials. As in other cases the amount was not liquidated.
Another involves the award and payment of P8.9 million for advertising and publicity services without requisite pre-procurement conferences. The same beneficiary was likewise awarded P9 million in consultancy fees sans necessary bidding protocols.
A fourth instance involved the purchase of watercraft for P15.9 million despite the craft’s secondhand engine and a P7.9-million down payment for a brand-new vessel.
Detailed in the recent plunder charge, these new anomalies seem to be variations of an old pillaging theme. If this is the kind of financial governance behind a hyped showcase LGU, then we’ve just promoted a pillaged and plundered province.
