Survey Results and Comments on Support from the Executive

7.2.2 Survey Results and Comments on Support from the Executive

Respondents comprising auditors and auditees were asked whether government provides support for improvements and changes in the public sector, after BPK reported its findings. Figure 7.4 (below) shows the survey results indicate positive responses from the auditees group on government support for BPK , with 57 per cent ‗agree‘ and 30 per cent ‗strongly agree‘. From the auditors group, 48 per cent ‗agree‘.

Figure 7.4 Survey Results on ‘Government Provides Support for BPK Results and R ecommendations’

s 30 ntage 34 rce Pe

0 3 5 4 1 0 1 Strongly Agree

Strongly disagree

Pe rce ptions

Auditors

Audtiees

Overall responses

Source: Fieldwork survey from 5 th November 2006 to 25 th March 2007.

Some of the positive comments from auditors and auditees are as follows:

 “Auditees have responded positively to BPK reports and have the commitment to make some corrections based on auditors’ recommendations” (Interview B17, an auditor of AKN I).

 “Under the new laws, audit recommendations from BPK help us to provide better management of state finances and improve the performance of organisations ” (Interview A7, an auditee from the Ministry of Education).

 “We have a commitment to support the roles and functions of BPK for better

performance in the public sector ” (Interview A22, an auditee from Bandung city) These quotes indicate that both auditors and auditees found BPK reports and

recommendations important to help public sector agencies provide better public administration, performance and accountability.

On the other hand, there were some negative and neutral responses during the survey. For the auditors‘ group, 48 per cent had a ‗neutral‘ response, 3 per cent ‗disagreed‘ and 1 per cent ‗strongly disagreed‘. For the auditees‘ group, 8 per cent responded ‗neutral‘ and 5 per cent responded ‗disagree‘. The survey results indicated that almost 50 per cent of

the auditors group responded as being uncertain or doubtful about support from the government. During the interview, auditors and auditees commented as follows:

 “To adapt to the reforms in the system of new state finance management in

government institutions which is not transparent and disordered, needs longer time ” (Interview A15, an auditee from Cianjur District).

 “Lack of commitment from auditees to change their attitude and to reform

financial administration ” (Interview B15, an auditorof AKN III). The statements indicate that government did not perform transparently and accountably in

managing state finances. Significant doubts from auditee and auditor about the ability of government to follow up audit reports and recommendations which can help the bureaucracy reform of financial public administration.

To conclude, the Indonesian government has not fully implemented the new government accounting standards (SAP 2005) as the basis of providing government financial statements. The efforts of the government to reform state financial management To conclude, the Indonesian government has not fully implemented the new government accounting standards (SAP 2005) as the basis of providing government financial statements. The efforts of the government to reform state financial management

financial statement reports. This is because BPK cannot audit the tax revenue office or foreign loans well as the due to the poor management of state assets and lack of transparency and accountability by government agencies. However, the response from government and the support from the President to make changes and to reform public administration based on BPK reports and recommendation, were still low. Up until 2008, some government agencies still showed no significant change in their commitment and behavior to reform their organisations to perform better in public accountability. BPK seeks to hold consultations and discussions with government agencies to improve government support and to provide collaborative solutions for improving anticorruption programs, transparency and accountability, and to implement necessary reforms in public sector agencies. BPK encourages the leaders of institutions and agencies to improve the accountability of state finances in many ways. These include (i) improving their accounting and financial reporting systems and information technology system, (ii) regulating government accounts, (iii) providing inventory and valuation of assets and liabilities, (iv) improving quality assurance from internal auditors, and (v) improving human resources quality who contributed and worked for management finance both at

central and local government. For example on 18 th July 2008 (Kasnah, November- December 2008: 40), BPK held discussions with all state institutions, including Members central and local government. For example on 18 th July 2008 (Kasnah, November- December 2008: 40), BPK held discussions with all state institutions, including Members