The brouhaha about those infamous dinners of President GMA in her party in the US recently refuse to die down. After all, those were legitimate issues that must not be simply ignored. If it has no leg to stand on for criminal prosecution, at least it should creates a public awareness or uproar in the hope that it will give some hard lessons to learn. But worthy to note that two party-list members of Congress have the courage and petitioned the Ombudsman to investigate them.
Relatedly, other than those lavish drinks and meals, the nature of a given travel of our officials need to be examined too. I want to share a piece of my mind on the natures of travel, whether foreign or local, because oftentimes they were misused or abused. Some officials euphemistically term them as Lakbay Aral or educational tours, in order to put some legitimacy to it, thus public funds and resources may be used to defray or subsidize most if not all of the expenses incurred. More of these lakbay will soon be a favorite stratagems of moneyed tradpols because the elections are forthcoming. It is a mode of corrupting the minds of the intended participants to realize an ulterior motive. In so doing, it is a classic style of a transactional leadership.
Invitation
Take that President’s travel to US for instance: The invitation may not have told PGMA to bring a number of delegates because, in fact, only few of them were allowed inside to meet President Obama. Senator Lapid was not even one of them despite of his desire to have a photo-ops with Mr. Obama. We have a custom that one must not go to a party if he was not invited. It is gate-crashing. Similarly, the one invited may not bring a companion, moreso if it is already a crowd.
That brings now the issue of the nature of a given travel, whether it is official or personal, by our government local or national officials. If it is by invitation or formal notification from the host, then it maybe official. And even then, there are requirements to comply, such as request for travel authority and, where applicable, a designation of an officer-in-charge who will assume the responsibilities of such traveling official. If it is personal or private, one has to file a leave of absence and in like manner, where applicable, a designation of an officer-in-charge. In fact, an invitation is still invitation, which one will accede to or not. Duty first before pleasure, so to speak.
Puro lakbay walang aral. Especially in times of under economic stress, the virtue of being prudent must be more observed. Such virtue must be more of, or supposedly possessed by, those who are in power because of the ethical command of public service: That a public servant must lead a simple life and no ostentatious display of wealth. Even if one can afford to finance one’s own travel, or is so rich enough to treat others for free travels or tours with accompanying meals, drinks, and souvenirs, such financial capability is not enough reason to do it, at will. All concerned must be sensitive enough to consider the various factors -- not only to satisfy personal fancies and luxuries of the junketeers on one hand, and the ulterior motives of the host on the other hand.
Among the various factors could be its necessity, or its urgency, or its significance, or its economic benefits, or even frequency of the lakbay aral. Should there be a necessity to proceed with the lakbay aral now or later? What are the economic benefits of the travel? Worthy to recall at this point of what a certain Governor did by disapproving a travel authority request of a Municipal Mayor. The Governor cited a prior travel permit granted by him in favor of the latter, rationalizing that travels should not be too frequent, otherwise constituents are prejudiced and regular delivery of services is undermined.
Those factors can be examined, initially, from the activity design which spells out the rationale, objectives, the participants, its significance, and then the itineraries and its budgetary requirements reflecting the source and usage of funds. In fact, the foregoing information are basic basis in the issuance or not of the corresponding travel authority.
Never the justifications will be made later just for purposes of liquidating expenses, or an excuse to be absent from official duties. After the travel, finally, the resultant benefit, or simply the aral component, can be measured from whatever action, project, plan, policy, proposal, recommendations, as the case may be, or anything tangible done or presented within a reasonable time after the travel as stated in the objectives. It cannot be none at all; otherwise, it is plain and simple lakbay, walang aral.
Post-travel reports
When I was still involved in the local government service, I initiated the issuance of a memorandum circular wherein the local chief executive directed all officials and personnel granted with a travel authority, particularly those attending conventions, seminars, trainings and the like using public funds and during official working hours to render a written post-travel/activity report. The report shall be made as integral part of the documentary liquidation papers of the expenses incurred.
The report has the following purposes: (1) it must be circulated so others may know also or at least have a share about the subject matters which the traveling official had participated in; (2) to suggest others, especially superiors and peers, that said traveling official has a working knowledge about the subject of the travel and when a situation demands the application of such knowledge, the records may be a reference; (3) the traveling official can be made as resource persons in echo-seminars on the subject because it is likely impossible that all persons in the workplace can attend at the same time; and (4) contents thereof could be potential reference in forthcoming development planning or decision- or policy-making processes.
Relatedly, other than those lavish drinks and meals, the nature of a given travel of our officials need to be examined too. I want to share a piece of my mind on the natures of travel, whether foreign or local, because oftentimes they were misused or abused. Some officials euphemistically term them as Lakbay Aral or educational tours, in order to put some legitimacy to it, thus public funds and resources may be used to defray or subsidize most if not all of the expenses incurred. More of these lakbay will soon be a favorite stratagems of moneyed tradpols because the elections are forthcoming. It is a mode of corrupting the minds of the intended participants to realize an ulterior motive. In so doing, it is a classic style of a transactional leadership.
Invitation
Take that President’s travel to US for instance: The invitation may not have told PGMA to bring a number of delegates because, in fact, only few of them were allowed inside to meet President Obama. Senator Lapid was not even one of them despite of his desire to have a photo-ops with Mr. Obama. We have a custom that one must not go to a party if he was not invited. It is gate-crashing. Similarly, the one invited may not bring a companion, moreso if it is already a crowd.
That brings now the issue of the nature of a given travel, whether it is official or personal, by our government local or national officials. If it is by invitation or formal notification from the host, then it maybe official. And even then, there are requirements to comply, such as request for travel authority and, where applicable, a designation of an officer-in-charge who will assume the responsibilities of such traveling official. If it is personal or private, one has to file a leave of absence and in like manner, where applicable, a designation of an officer-in-charge. In fact, an invitation is still invitation, which one will accede to or not. Duty first before pleasure, so to speak.
Puro lakbay walang aral. Especially in times of under economic stress, the virtue of being prudent must be more observed. Such virtue must be more of, or supposedly possessed by, those who are in power because of the ethical command of public service: That a public servant must lead a simple life and no ostentatious display of wealth. Even if one can afford to finance one’s own travel, or is so rich enough to treat others for free travels or tours with accompanying meals, drinks, and souvenirs, such financial capability is not enough reason to do it, at will. All concerned must be sensitive enough to consider the various factors -- not only to satisfy personal fancies and luxuries of the junketeers on one hand, and the ulterior motives of the host on the other hand.
Among the various factors could be its necessity, or its urgency, or its significance, or its economic benefits, or even frequency of the lakbay aral. Should there be a necessity to proceed with the lakbay aral now or later? What are the economic benefits of the travel? Worthy to recall at this point of what a certain Governor did by disapproving a travel authority request of a Municipal Mayor. The Governor cited a prior travel permit granted by him in favor of the latter, rationalizing that travels should not be too frequent, otherwise constituents are prejudiced and regular delivery of services is undermined.
Those factors can be examined, initially, from the activity design which spells out the rationale, objectives, the participants, its significance, and then the itineraries and its budgetary requirements reflecting the source and usage of funds. In fact, the foregoing information are basic basis in the issuance or not of the corresponding travel authority.
Never the justifications will be made later just for purposes of liquidating expenses, or an excuse to be absent from official duties. After the travel, finally, the resultant benefit, or simply the aral component, can be measured from whatever action, project, plan, policy, proposal, recommendations, as the case may be, or anything tangible done or presented within a reasonable time after the travel as stated in the objectives. It cannot be none at all; otherwise, it is plain and simple lakbay, walang aral.
Post-travel reports
When I was still involved in the local government service, I initiated the issuance of a memorandum circular wherein the local chief executive directed all officials and personnel granted with a travel authority, particularly those attending conventions, seminars, trainings and the like using public funds and during official working hours to render a written post-travel/activity report. The report shall be made as integral part of the documentary liquidation papers of the expenses incurred.
The report has the following purposes: (1) it must be circulated so others may know also or at least have a share about the subject matters which the traveling official had participated in; (2) to suggest others, especially superiors and peers, that said traveling official has a working knowledge about the subject of the travel and when a situation demands the application of such knowledge, the records may be a reference; (3) the traveling official can be made as resource persons in echo-seminars on the subject because it is likely impossible that all persons in the workplace can attend at the same time; and (4) contents thereof could be potential reference in forthcoming development planning or decision- or policy-making processes.
In short, there is an aral that does not only to benefit the traveler but, directly or indirectly, to others who may use the report. If one has nothing to report substantially, simply because he learned nothing and, to make matters doubly worse, the taxpayers money were squandered for nothing. In effect, the command of the circular is also to at least compel the concerned official to be attentive, and thus prevents him to just register then sleep, or get out and do some shopping, attend parties, or whatever.
Budget and expenditures for travels
Indeed for every office or entity, it has its own approved allocation to finance official travel expenditures. However, applicable rules and regulations demand that one must operate within the budget.
There is no more prudence, no fairness and no sound fiscal management if:
(1) actual expenses already exceeded the approved allocation for travels; or
(2) travels benefited only one or few officials despite of the fact that such total allocation is
for the whole and entire complement of an office or entity; or
Budget and expenditures for travels
Indeed for every office or entity, it has its own approved allocation to finance official travel expenditures. However, applicable rules and regulations demand that one must operate within the budget.
There is no more prudence, no fairness and no sound fiscal management if:
(1) actual expenses already exceeded the approved allocation for travels; or
(2) travels benefited only one or few officials despite of the fact that such total allocation is
for the whole and entire complement of an office or entity; or
(3) the frequency of travel is so often and mostly of the same nature, such as Lakbay Aral, or
simply for familiarization tours, which may not be urgent, or of utmost necessity, and
questionable economic significance vis-à-vis the economic crisis; or
(4) initiate seminars or conventions in a far and expensive venues where in fact it can be
done in the locality ; or
(4) initiate seminars or conventions in a far and expensive venues where in fact it can be
done in the locality ; or
(5) the budget supposedly covers fairly most of the officials and personnel in the workplace
or entity, yet benefiting only by one or few and the same favored ones.
or entity, yet benefiting only by one or few and the same favored ones.
What is more objectionable is, upon analyzing seriously of the agency’s funds utilization, the result of which would reveal that the office or entity spent a lot more public funds for such lakbay incurred by only one, or few, or the same concerned officials compared to what has been made actually available and spent for the repair and rehabilitation of damages left by calamities or for relief assistance to victims.
Consider this claim: A mere barangay captain, his barangay was compelled to spend P10,000.00 for his participation in a lakbay aral, compared to the meager P5,000,00 used for disaster relief operations because of of his reasons of inadequacy of funds for the latter.
Simply stated, the lakbay is more important than saving lives and properties. It is gross insensitivity to the plight of the needy. As expected, those junketeers do not tell it, or admit it. If brought to discussion, they will just counter it as a politically motivated, or say curtly: inggit lang sila! They are suggesting that: If you want easy tours, just become a government official.
Other foul practices
People should be more watchful and vigilant on the nefarious schemes employed by some notorious organizers and participants of these so-called lakbay aral. I have heard confessions from some participants.
One. They impose considerable amount of registration fees yet there is a big chunk thereof that will be returned to the registrant intended for his or her private or personal use. So, the entity’s budget is subsidizing the private and personal needs of their traveling official. To carry this out, the organizers will make a complicated itineraries, or with seemingly substantive issues to be discussed, but in truth and in fact, such only exist in papers. Whether those were indeed done and completed, no one knows. The Commission on Audit doesn’t care about it because in liquidating expenses, it is generally limited in the basic documentary requirements, such as travel order, the certificate of attendance, and that listed itinerary of travel which auditors care less if true or not.
Second. There are some officials participating in seminars, conventions, etc will register in the attendance sheet but leaves the hall to attend instead to private social events, like wedding or birthday celebrations. And when he returns and liquidates expenses, he falsify or cause the alteration of the hotel receipts, or the itineraries, in order to bloat the reimbursable amount of expenses. Ginastusan na, kumita pa!
Third. There are nasty reports where along their way, some delegates in the lakbay engage in gambling. The nasty part there is the report that the supposed government money advanced to him was instead used for betting. What is even nastier there is the behavior – as if proud to narrate of those experiences of gambling and drinking to the max, but no mention of the aral worthy to be translated into action, worthy to be shared with peers, superiors or subordinates.
Fourth. A lakbay aral is almost always planned by top level officials. As such, and in most cases, it is designed to cater their own benefits. Seldom that there is lakbay aral for clerks, janitors and low-ranking officials or personnel, exclusively for them or at least includes them. Simply because, some are not really educational tours but a goodwill ones to gain political support, or to appease potential critics in the hope to silence or deadens their senses through luxury mode of transportation, lavish meals and caviars, with matching dances and singing in the bars. Utang na loob daw yun?
Why not also plan and organize a Lakbay Diwa?
