I WAS READING SENATOR MIRIAMS DISSENTING OPINION ON THE RENEWED DEFINITION OF SAVINGS and in some part I tend to agree with her. The part where I agree with her is that Congress should have the final say on what the budget is appropriated for. HOWEVER... I do not agree that savings cannot be determined mid year or even earlier. Anyone familiar with the procurement process in govt knows that there are any number of reasons why a BUDGETED PROGRAM or PURCHASE may not push through. Also considering that the program or project has to be funded BEFORE it is set up for bidding ( which is what congress approved before year end and before the next fiscal year) then if for any reason the bidding fails then there will automatically be a literal excess of cash in that department. To illustrate for clarity. Lets say a railroad is going through an informal settlers area and the projected time of eviction to make way for the project is January next year 2015 . As early as 2014, the DSWD (for example) has to allocate X amount to assist the settlers in their move. So around November of 2014, congress approves the assistance budget. Now lets say again, that in late 2014 (December lets say) the engineering division of the railway project finds that for one reason or another, the railway will be delayed two years and will therefore no longer need the moving of the informal settlers in Jan 2015. The situation is that the DSWD now has X amount allocated for the project to move the informals but will not need it for 2015 but rather will need it for 2017. What then is to be done with the budget? Lets also then assume that the DSWD has no other projects to allocate the X amount. Then this becomes a surplus for the National Government. If we assume that all cash to be spent is directed towards national development the NOT SPENDING this X amount will be tantamount to not delivering ADDITIONAL services then if you wait till the end of the year to declare savings what you are actually doing is DEPRIVING some other sector of funds that were freed up early in the year. Now heres where I converge back to Senator Miriams point that all expenses have to be approved by congress. I would propose that aside from named and approved projects, each agency have a 2nd named list of approved but waiting for funding projects. That way, any projects that cannot be delivered, and therefore will result in money not spent OR SAVINGS, can be shelved and a replacement project ALREADY APPROVED FOR INTENT by congress but until that moment funding is found, lacking in budget, can be put in to take its place. Now of course congress likes to deal in exact amounts and reallocating to another agency (not to be confused with realigning within the same agency) may leave butal or inexact change left over. But certainly MAXIMUM USE OF BUDGET for public service can justify a separate accounting system to accommodate unexpectedly unused budgets as long as the recipient or replacement project has been previously approved by congress. That way Congress still has full control over what is to be spent on and not only that, unforeseen circumstances can be addressed and maximum value can be derived from the approved budget for the year.
Posted on: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 07:22:52 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015