Last March, we wrote about the Naga City Mayor Jesse Robredo's "confidential expenses" worth Php1,420,500.00 of taxpayers' money, after Vox Bikol columnist Che Carpio subjected to scrutiny the city government's proud claim of transparency in its operations. Carpio had taken to task the city government's claim of transparency by tracking down a Commission on Audit report for 2007 which declared the existence of such an expense of the city mayor.
Accordingly, this paper demanded to know that what those expenses were, which were ironically under the heading "Transparency at Work" in Naga City government's website, www.naga.gov.ph.
Sending a reporter to get a statement from the Mayor's office, we were texted, through the reporter, that Mayor Robredo would be issuing a reply to this inquiry, notwithstanding a supposedly forthcoming response from the City Auditor's Office. True enough, the City Auditor's Office through Ms. Paciencia Tabinas issued a reply; however, it was one which did not respond to what exactly did taxpayer' pay for with their Php 1,420,500.00. Tabinas' reply consisted of an admission that COA requirements were difficult to comply with as "a result of lack of enough manpower to take care of [them]," and the assurance that "[her] office always makes sure that no procurement procedure is violated." We were not assured; the huge amount remained inadequately accounted for to the public.
What about the Mayor's "promised" reply? Nothing but silence.
Thus, we rehearse to the much lauded mayor of Naga City who is part of a movement for good governance and ethical leadership the questions we raised two months ago: was the huge amount of Php1,420,500.00 from taxpayers money used for "intelligence purposes for law enforcement or similar purposes" given that it was labeled "confidential expenses"? Or was it used as "discretionary funds" in the same way that traditional politicians are said to use them?
In a truly transparent government such queries would be welcome. They would not be dismissed, forgotten or ignored. Looking at how the city government has treated these queries so far, we cannot but seriously doubt its much touted claim of transparency and good governance. For as things stand, those expenses seem too confidential to be discussed.