When will we ever learn from the A-G's report?

THERE will be a sense of déjà vu whenever the Auditor-General’s (A-G) report is released. Same story, different year.

'Why are projects always problematic? Why are they always late? Why are things always more expensive than normal? Why are things always of such low quality?'

According to Tan Sri Ambrin Buang, the A-G himself, these are common questions in the eyes of the public.

My question is this: if the problems are the same, then why Malaysia— in particular the government departments and Ministries— seem to never learn?

Ambrin was speaking at a forum organized by Sinar Harian yesterday which delved into his department’s annual report.

This forum was quite colourful: aside from the auditor, we also had the investigator (Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission or MACC), the parliamentary watchdog body (Public Accounts Committee or PAC), and the BN and Pakatan politicians(both in the PAC).

Towards the end, Ambrin said that two big weaknesses in the government can be summed up with 2Cs: "communication" and "coordination”.

Two simple words, but perhaps it contains much more complex issues. Let me try to dissect them myself:

When we talk about communication, we are talking about a lack of it.

Reports about the AG’s report mainly comes from the media, which often plays the role of “naming and shaming”. But a big bulk of what is written within is not filtered through to the people. More problematic is when inaccuracies appear in news reports too.

While it is absolutely vital that the media highlight all the juicy, negative, bits, what always seem to remain a mystery are the key learning and the changes being done.

Ambrin also did mention that many people who talk about the report did not even read it. Yes, his department’s job is to complete the report, these thick and heavy tomes, but who else can help filter down the messages within if not the government agencies themselves?

Often even when there are corrective measures being done, and issues already ‘solved’, our good civil servants don’t even know how to shout about it to the public. This merely strengthens the public’s perception that they are not doing their job well enough.

When we talk about coordination, one issue the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission chief commissioner Tan Sri Mohamed Abu Kassim mentioned was that people often think that everything in the AG’s report was all about corruption.

Apparently, among other things, it is about ‘carelessness’ and ‘stupidity’ too, as seen in his frustration that people can’t be charged with having either of those two qualities.

Cases of cheating and criminal breach of trust comes under the police. And there are the public service department for meting out disciplinary measures.

My question is this then: Can there be greater coordination between the MACC and police? How effective is the Public Service Department in cracking their whip? Is coordination and cooperation about covering up each others' faults?

A lot of the blame seem to fall on heads of departments as both Abu Kassim and Ambrin expressed their frustrations with them. From what both said, it seems that government heads are often unaware of the problems or are unable to quickly act, despite being told to, to change things.

For Abu Kassim, these heads must also take responsibility over wrongdoings and not just leave things to the police and MACC.

Though both of them fell short of saying heads must roll, i.e: resignations.

Another problem for MACC is that the audit report is secret until it is tabled in parliament (this could take up to one whole year). For the MACC to wait before taking action often means its 'too little, too late'.

Abu Kassim cited a case where MACC wanted to ‘surprise’ the alleged culprits but were themselves ‘surprised’ and when they reached the doorsteps of the 'perpetrators' and found that the issue has already been resolved. "Malu" (shame) for the officers.

Aside from suggestions for the department heads to be transparent themselves. Why not allow the auditors to coordinate with the MACC if there may be elements of corruption?

Another thing is this: When one department is under the spotlight, does another ministry take note of the upgrading of procedures that can be applied for themselves too?

In between the statements by MACC and AG, what about the parliamentary watchdog, the PAC? What’s its role?

On one side we have DAP’s Tony Pua calling it toothless and a UMNO's PAC chairman Nur Jazlan Mohamed defending it’s bite.

At the end of the day, will all these things said in the forum be just talk and noise? Will next year be déjà vu all over again?

Can Ambrin Buang's vision and message to civil servants: 'membetulkan yang biasa & membiasakan yang betul'(Correct the norm, and normalize what is right) really materialize?

Ambrin said that the AG’s Report is like a song from the 60's that has its “tales” and also has its “morals”.

If we do not listen closely to these lyrics, I just wonder how long a broken record remains broken.