To determine the public audit we must take the current time as a starting point. However, what is the current status of the public audit?
The search or investigation of the possible answer cannot be the product of an intimate confession, which exposes the doubts and demands of those who abandon themselves to it, nor a dogmatic exposition (dogmatism, the articles or investigations that they do not try to propose a search for proof; while public auditing must be supported by a method, a fundamental condition that would allow it to be supported by its truth, and because a knowledge that is reputed to be true requires being demonstrated as such), which may be anything original or new that is desired, but that, precisely because it is a point of view, is reduced to an individual expression. But when does the individual writing about the public audit go beyond personal comment, panoramic exploration of the topic, or exhaustive presentation of the case?
At the base of all scientific and philosophical research, but also in all theoretical or practical activity, is an attempt at renewal and an affirmation of freedom. In this sense, research activity is opposed to myth, tradition, prejudice and in general to any attitude that tends to immobilize man in the possession and passive enjoyment of an already established heritage of beliefs. Resorting to research means freeing oneself from presuppositions (even when regulations and their conception are sacred) and obstacles of all kinds that tend to limit not only research, but above all reason; since this supposes an independent attitude of investigation. The origin of the audit as an independent practice arises precisely from its rational nature,but the historically original meaning has succumbed under the concept of uniformity, sustained with the affirmation of, "the generally accepted" which has resulted in a culture that has eradicated dissent and diversity. And the contradiction arises when it is approved that within the process of improvement in the practice of public auditing, it is demanded “that the public powers bet on research, creating a culture so that science flourishes and leaving room for intellectual creativity” and the The field of auditing with its associations, institutions, organizations and universities is alien to the determination of scientificity.And the contradiction arises when it is approved that within the process of improvement in the practice of public auditing, it is demanded “that the public powers bet on research, creating a culture so that science flourishes and leaving room for intellectual creativity” and the The field of auditing with its associations, institutions, organizations and universities is alien to the determination of scientificity.And the contradiction arises when it is approved that within the process of improvement in the practice of public auditing, it is demanded “that the public powers bet on research, creating a culture so that science flourishes and leaving room for intellectual creativity” and the The field of auditing with its associations, institutions, organizations and universities is alien to the determination of scientificity.
Yes we must claim, let us claim to the audit his omniscient vision and his lack of humility. Because it has not recognized its conditioning and limitation, the basis of all rational inquiry. The genesis of the audit has its antecedent and determinant in the private audit, and this for decades never faced doubts or questions until it became the watershed of Enron, the globality, the crisis, and the increasing citizen participation that they have put to the audit, and above all, to the public in the "eye of the hurricane"; notwithstanding that the general thought of the audit affirms to us that the storm has not affected its foundations, and that the ocean returns to tranquility again.
Until today, the audit has been the beacon that has guided the approval and justification of the management of public or private funds, despite the fact that in particular cases the lack of clarity has led companies and entities to run aground, or the general situation of crisis has put the economy, the finances of governments on the brink of shipwreck, or paradoxically, attempts are being made to regain confidence in the audit when it is not debated in the audit, if the beacon is lost in its orientation. And the lack of debate between auditors, associations, academics, organizations, and citizens, could constitute the condition for its rectification or reorientation.
This requires a new attitude and a new direction in the thinking of the audit. Because governments and organizations have imposed a directionality in which it is privileged to reinforce auditing, through control, regulation, and supervision; more has been omitted to ask:
Why the audit?
In the field of auditing, so many publications related to the doing or doing of auditing are never written and presented as today, but such positioning has become a problem, because the issue is not "doing" but unraveling "why "
The indeterminacy of the audit has originated because your professional practice has been reduced simply to repeating a pattern, or expressed in another way “the aversion that any change produces when you have been working in a different way all your life. For this reason, for the change to take place, the participation of the members of the upper part of the pyramid is required, because if they do not lead and force the change, it will hardly take place. ” Just as the ancients accepted on the basis of "the generally accepted" that the sun revolved around our planet, or the Earth was flat, or so many other issues that stemmed from error, ignorance, or superstition.
In addition to that every cultural or social system presents dark, confused or hidden areas, this is why science has emerged, which investigates what is ignored, providing explanatory theories of a reality that is not fully known.
But the audit seems to be in a reality, of which it knows the whole. In a dimension where historical, political, and social constraints do not affect you, and in any case, if you perceive them, you have not been willing to start your determination.
Actuality means a fact or event that occupies and attracts people's attention at a given moment, but also current means that it exists or happens now, it is present time. Making the public audit current, means, bringing it up to date or updating it; This is the meaning and meaning of our actuality. And consequently it would be more in keeping with its history, to inquire, why its outdatedness?
Because a brief analysis indicates that “Traditionally, the reforms in public accounting took place with some delay with respect to those carried out in the private sphere. And in the consolidation of financial statements, there is obviously a considerable gap between the public and private spheres (…) In the public sector, there is no comparable regulation ”. As it is also stated that it has not been addressed in the Public Administration as it has been in the private sector, the convenience of “Implementing internal control mechanisms in the Public Administration in accordance with the principles of good corporate governance (…) and creation of committees of audit ”.Although Miguel Barquero oppositely wonders “what has happened in the large American financial institutions that have failed this past year? Did the audit committees and internal auditors not detect anything previously? ”.
Although it is predominantly accepted “An invasion of methods of control and management of the private sector that has no place in public management has operated in the public sector. Private methods cannot be applied to the public sector, without more ”. So, if it is recognized that the theoretical accounting and auditing body in the public sector is lagging behind, it is not surprising that Rafael Medina Jáber claims that there is an invasion; and in a more dramatic way, its elimination is noted, "In the words of Estefanía Moreira, the search for a new balance between the State and the Market, without either side of the binomial trying to drown the other."
Obviously there is a greater number of opinions, references, and contradictions in this regard, but the trend prevails and is demonstrated in the III National Congress of Auditing in the Public Sector, which has established a table with the theme of "The collaboration of private firms in the public sector audit ”. Affirming that such collaboration may be justified in the following reasons:
- Due to the social demand for greater transparency in public management. Due to the continuous growth of the number of entities that make up the public sector and the need to expand control actions. Insufficient resources in the control bodies of the Public Administrations. For economic and efficiency reasons in the management of the control bodies themselves.
The above leads us to propose:
This strategy is said to emerge as a “new way” in reaction to the fact that “a good part of the political-economic debate of the last decades, as well as some experiences have confronted the public and private sectors. They have been seen as exclusive alternatives rather than as a complement to the promotion of the common good ”according to the Resolution of the Ibero-American Conference of Ministers of Public Administration and State Reform, where guidelines and cooperation on 'Associations between Public and private; in search of complementarity ', with the purpose of contributing to the institutions of the Ibero-American States being equipped with the necessary capacities to ensure democratic governance and the achievement of the objectives of economic development, well-being and social equity.
Likewise, the International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI) and the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) at the IIA annual conference held on July 10 and 11, 2007, “underlined the common objectives of external and internal control and the need for close cooperation and an exchange of experiences and common development in terms of guidelines and methods (…) Both institutions underline their intention to cooperate as equal parts ”.
However, the study of the private and public sphere represents venturing into one of the most debated and important issues of human coexistence "Norberto Bobbio himself, in the Dictionary of Politics, reminds us that this pair of terms (public / private) he entered the political and social history of the West with two well-known paragraphs of the Corpus iuris (institutions, II, 4; Digest, I, I, I, 2). Since then, the topic has grown in importance to become one of the great dichotomies of political thought, as important as war and peace, democracy and autocracy, society and community, etc. ”
In the public administration, and specifically, in the audit or inspection, is the position that claims not to distinguish the public from the private. And another, clearly bets on overcoming duality based on collaboration or complementarity. The first reduces reality at the cost of unsatisfactory simplification. And the second is based on the desire to have two different images, under the assumption that each dimension offers, by its own nature, a different image, which reveals different aspects and that, therefore, knowledge and effectiveness; through a logic of coexistence, where their approaches to each audit are equally valued, respecting their respective contributions. More, it is important to know,if the complexity of public reality necessarily corresponds to an epistemological approach, as a cognitive pluralism of each dimension.
In any case, it would be necessary to incorporate epistemology into the audit discourse, as a theory towards its ways of knowing (of the origin, validity and limits of knowledge), and methodological (defining whether public auditing and private auditing truly count each one). of them with a method, if it is the same, and in what way they converge. If public reality can be investigated with the same procedures and techniques that are applied in the private sector), it is to know if collaboration leads to convergence or synthesis, as well as the form of its demonstration. Or, if the complementation leads us to two different and completely independent reports, or if there is an integrating scheme that allows the practice of public auditing to be united with that practiced in particular.
Collaborative declarations must go beyond simple good intentions, and in any case, conceptual clarity is required, if the divide between public and private auditing obeys conventionalism, where differences are not decisive, and consequently it can be passed from one field to another, as it has been up to now, as a tradition that has not truly faced its challenge. Or, if the dichotomy is the expression of a complexity of administration, audit, and the social.
It would be absurd to determine the actuality of the public audit without connecting it with its social and historical dimension, nor is it possible to ignore the ideas or thoughts that the auditors express in articles, essays, or interviews, since they reflect in some way that reality.
In principle, the notion of auditing escapes us very easily. For example, by saying only 'environmental audit', the term audit remains implicit, or subordinate to the concept of environmental, and this becomes dominant, to the extent that it seems not important to determine, what is the audit. Consequently, when we refer to auditing (in everyday life and professionalism), we use this term as if it were fully understandable and unambiguous. Derived from the loss of the sense of modernizing the vocabulary and thinking in the audit, and above all, in relation to the public. Because the reality of public audit is complex due to the blurring between public and private.
The complexity can be understood, then, from the simplification of claiming that "the collaboration of private audit firms in the public sector may be justified in (…) the social demand for greater transparency in public management" as stated in Table II of the III National Congress of Public Audit in Spain. This has meant that it is established as a direction through its agenda in Administration and Inspection.
To claim complementarity means to complement a thing, and complement indicates a quality or circumstance that is added to another to make it whole or perfect. In such a way that the collaboration strategy tries to overcome the duality of the audit on a level of equality, despite the fact that the supremacy of the theory of the private sector has been and is manifest. From classic Administration texts where “What can the private sector teach the non-profit sector? The purpose of this chapter is to show that numerous lessons learned about strategic planning can be applied in the non-profit sector (…) although there are more dissimilarities than similarities ”. To the Auditing Standards, "In my opinion,Contrary to the majority opinion that is deduced from the regulation of the procedures in the OCEX in Spain, there are more differences that exist between the external control of the public sector and the audit of the private sector than their similarities (…)
The OCEX Principles and Standards for Public Sector Auditing do not adequately regulate the inspection procedures and techniques, because they do not take into account the existing differences ”, and on the contrary affirm“ The only differentiation that we can find is the fact that compliance with the law (…) is included as an objective of internal control (…) in the different regulations that govern the profession of External Control of the Public Sector (…) do not present discrepancies with the Technical Auditing Standards issued by the ICAC for the regulation of the audit of 'private' entities ”. Because the “normal and general” acceptance has led to the expression that “we were increasingly clear that the only way out of our problem was to go to private audit firms that would solve, or at least alleviate,the pressing delay that was still accumulating in our work "especially when it is justified as a" reason "in the III National Congress of Auditing in the Public Sector of Spain, recognizing the insufficiency of own resources in the control bodies of the Administrations Public.
The collaboration strategy is based on equality. But equality is only established between equals, not unequal. And the public audit has been permanently outdated, dependent, delayed, and inadequate. An example illustrates such a vision: Students and auditing professionals go to the reading and study of the Public Audit magazine, because it is obviously a current publication (in the sense that exists or happens now, although if the statement was based on the other significance that refers us to the facts or events that occupy and attract people's attention at any given time, an examination would indicate that not all events that are considered "current" are important and necessary,The media phenomenon accounts for this by placing in the public opinion a diversity of issues and themes that are generally superficial, however, the path of specialized magazines has to do with the development of knowledge, and history shows us that This process is not subject to the interest of the majority, although in the end its result benefits the entire society), but José Andrés Ruiz del Molino, winner of the XI Public Audit Awards, in his response to the opinion of the magazine and suggestion that I could improve it, he says “I also miss the fact that there are no editorials on current issues in the magazine. Although it is not a function of the magazine, it would also not be a bad idea to periodically organize a seminar on issues of interest. ” Which leads us to:
The task of contemporary public auditing is precisely to put it first, as a primary and fundamental requirement. If we accept that, through public auditing, public reality can manifest its determinations, limits, properties and categories, we must admit that it is not such that it makes public auditing impossible. Their task does not remain outside of public reality, but happens in some way to constitute it, and to build it. It can also be considered that the exercise and practice of public audit depends on the public reality towards which it is directed, and it is evident that there is a relationship between public audit and its reality, which must be made clear, but this relationship does not it is determined and must be determined, and is therefore a problem.
The public reality manifests itself in the current crisis, but in the professional field of public auditing it has only been reduced to a financial crisis, as stated: “In conclusion we highlight that accounting and auditing regulations have not been one of the elements main triggers of the current crisis, unlike the one that occurred at the beginning of the present decade with the already famous ENRON case, that is, the current crisis is basically financial and of loss of confidence ”.
Although an economic analyst asserts "What we are experiencing is not a crisis of capitalism, it is a crisis of finance, democracy, globalization and, ultimately, of ethics", and a philosopher affirms about the emergence of the crisis, that since the Decade of the sixties, we are witnessing a transformation that has gradually led to the great crisis "It is not, as the media says, a mere political crisis, or a social or economic crisis, no. The real crisis is a historical crisis and it is of such magnitude that it prevents us from seeing its results clearly. It is a true crisis, hence its darkness ”, it should be noted that this statement was made in 2005, and its importance lies in not reducing the problem of the crisis to a date, a year, or a temporary and conjunctural issue.Because if the origin and magnitude of the crisis is unknown, then how can its effects and severity be overcome?
It is stated that we can only change what we know. And citizens have believed that governments and organizations know and have the solution to prevent and combat fraud, corruption, as well as to overcome the economic crisis, through a set of provisions and guidelines that have become a guide, especially, for public audit or inspection. Such as:
- Administration of Anti-fraud Programs and Controls. International Convergence of Capital Measurements and Norms. Basel Committee. United Nations Convention against Corruption. UNCAC. Statement on DNA Auditing Standards (SAS-99) (AU-316). Consideration of fraud in the Financial Statements. Sarbanes Oxley Act. International Auditing Standard NIA (ISA). Section 240, Auditor's Responsibilities for Considering Fraud and Error in an Audit of Financial Statements. Improvement of the regulation and international coordination on the actors and financial markets. Greater vigilance over risk rating agencies and their possible conflicts of interest. Creation of a college of supervisors to control financial institutions. Harmonization and revision of international accounting standards,especially on the application of the fair value criterion.
Yes, the current situation of public auditing cannot be understood without relating it to the international financial crisis, its frauds and corruption. Nor can they be solved if the support of the conception is not examined, whose basic principles (G-20 meeting, November 15, 2008) are:
- Strengthen cooperation and work together to restore economic growth in the world and carry out the necessary reforms in the global financial systems. Laying the foundations for reforms that help ensure that a global crisis, such as the one in question, does not It will never happen again.Our work will be guided by a shared trust in which market principles, unfettered trading and investment conditions and effectively regulated financial markets foster dynamism, innovation and spirit. entrepreneurial that are essential for economic growth, employment and poverty reduction.
From which the consideration has come off "I could not put a comma on these general principles, unless the crisis never 'occurs again'". However, adding a comma would be insufficient, rather we should question its total statement. Because by leaving aside the criticism of the audit, the thought is privileged “that accountants and auditors are not being excessively affected, due to the intense regulation and supervision of their activity that arose as a consequence of the aforementioned ENRON case. In order to restore this confidence to the markets, the contribution of the auditors and the values that they represent to society are recognized as essential in order to promote transparent, reliable, quality and independent financial information.
The previous comments being true ”, that is, the fallacy of authority takes precedence with the expression that“ the comments are true ”and is nuanced with the tenuous observation about“ never ever ”, but“ Following the bankruptcy of 1929, he intervened the federal government and passed the Securities and Exchange Law. The purchase in installments was reduced and it became practically impossible to manipulate with the share price. Thanks to the vigorous application of the statutes established by the Securities and Exchange Commission, most experts believe that there will never be another bankruptcy like the one in 1929 ”.
Centers of power and governments encourage the hope of certainty with phrases such as: "economic growth will be restored"; "A crisis like the one in question will never happen again"; and, "our work will be guided by a trust to promote employment and poverty reduction." But there is a disconnect between what people see and what they hear, often from their own authority about what is happening. For example “The company Ernest & Young periodically conducts fraud studies in organizations. He has just published his latest research among 2,250 employees of large European companies, in a total of 22 states. The survey highlights the general lack of confidence of employees in managers ”.Trust implies the existence of transparency between rulers and ruled. It is not a matter of good intentions, it is necessary to guarantee transparency.
The guarantee includes the right of access to information, but also the promotion of a culture of accountability that has the three main dimensions: information, justification and sanction. It has been believed that to be accountable is only to inform, but also the representatives (governments, control authorities, etc.) have the obligation to explain and justify the decisions they make, and this is not a common practice. Faced with the clouds that hang over the economic and social scenario, transparency must guide and determine the performance of the public audit or inspection.
The public is what is in the general interest, must be in the light, everyone must be able to see it. Not only must the audit include clear and simple elements, public accounting as well. Redefining them is a requirement. If the public audit aspires to guarantee the citizen the possibility of evaluating the management of public funds in a responsible and honest manner, it will not be able to promise definitive solutions, nor infallible guarantees and guarantees, such as the provisions and guidelines approved by governments and institutions that They continue to promise what cannot be kept.
The importance of writing or reflecting on the audit is found in the word of audit itself, which appears to be authorized to grant its own validation or truth criteria. Thus, the term audit appears inescapably and indissolubly in any human activity where the review is carried out, such as: environmental audit, ethical audit, quality audit, global audit, political audit, systems audit, social audit, etc.
In addition to the various types of audits that are enunciated in each country, but there is no uniformity (clearly, it is not a question of confusing the regulations that have governed the thinking of the audit that “against all odds” continues, in essence, the same directionality, with the individual or group freedom of auditors who promote a particular conception of auditing or who decide whether to adopt international auditing standards, but which has lacked the reflection or foundation of an Audit Theory, which allows re -construct the divide between the public and the private to observe reality again) in this regard, much less there is a history of the audit that accounts for each of them. Because audits arise and disappear, that is, they have a beginning and an end.At the beginning it is the novelty that later became fashion and it is even considered a universal panacea.
But the novelties with novelties are forgotten and soon "new audits" appear (such as the forensic audit that claims to be a science but does not show or demonstrate that its conceptualization is in accordance with the structure of the scientific phenomenon) that they claim will eradicate the evils of administration.
Leave behind the audit of the 20th century, dominated by private auditing, which has hidden that the public reality is different; with a new object that asks for new conceptual instruments and new theoretical foundations. The reasonableness of the statements in the financial statements has not served to prevent fraud and corruption, but it has also not served for true accountability and transparency.
Today we know that it is not enough to coo in the faith of security in the audit. For certainty to reemerge, it is necessary to rethink the public; if the public audit is directed to fulfill the general interest, or has the capacity to eliminate the private, partisan, and negative interests.
Then we can begin to fully investigate the close interdependence between reality and audit. There is no doubt that this requirement can be silenced or overlooked, but the supposed independence and validity of the audit will continue to create uncertainties and doubts. But it can be put in first place, in order to reestablish the link between man and society, and also between man and nature, and if possible, public management is recovered through the positive and construction.
