Tiangco blasts COA on hidden Taguig audit report


UNITED Nationalist Alliance (UNA) interim president Rep. Tobias Tiangco of Navotas City (Metro Manila) on Tuesday lambasted the Commission on Audit (COA) for not making available on its website its audit report on the billion-peso releases for Taguig City under the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF).

“Why does the city of Taguig, unlike the rest of the local government units, not have an audit report on the website of the Commission on Audit?” Tiangco asked.

“Is there a Taguig cover-up? Anyare [What happened]? The year is almost over but the report on Taguig is yet to be posted. I assumed the last one to be uploaded was on Pasig City last October 1. The rest were, I think, uploaded by batches, on same dates. Is Taguig hiding something from the public?” further asked.

Tiangco said the COA’s audit reports only sow confusion over the varying presentation of its PDAF audits for the years 2007 to 2009 and 2010 to 2013.

He explained that he himself was confused why there are two different presentations on the PDAF audit findings for the years 2007 to 2009 and 2010 to 2012.

“Is COA trying to confuse the people with these different presentations?” the UNA official said.

For purposes of a common reference, Tiangco added that COA should have followed the same presentations it did for the 2007-2009 audit to the 2010-2012 audit.

“For 2007 to 2009 [audit reports], you can easily see where the funds went, who funded the project and where did the funds come from. But in the 2010 to 2012 report, COA is saying the per agency auditing was used, so you have to look for the agency where the PDAF was used to see the audit results,” he noted.

“COA should have used same presentation for the two audits because it’s easier to see the big picture if there is a single comprehensive report, unlike the per agency scheme, unless they really want to hide something from the public,” Tiangco said. “Until today, no legislator or even other government officials have been charged for the misuse of the PDAF for the period 2010 to 2012, so it raises a cloud of suspicion.”


Please follow our commenting guidelines.

Comments are closed.