Law No.17/2003 on State Finance has changed its financial management systems and patterns of state. The system that brought in the law is a system of performance-based budgeting (performance budgeting system) which makes the performance as a focus so that all potential should be directed to support the desired performance to be achieved. Simply explained, announced that the performance achieved with the funding allocated efficiently and effectively. In line with the provisions stipulated in Law No.17 of 2003, the Minister of Finance as an assistant to the President in the field of finance is essentially a Chief Financial Officer (CFO) GOI while each Minister / Head of Institution is Operacional Chief Officer (COO) for the field of governmental tasks statu . To increase accountability and ensure implementation of each test (checks and balances) in the process of budget execution, there should be strict separation between the holders of administrative authority which was submitted to the ministries / agencies and holders of treasury authorities submitted to the finance ministry.

• Highlighting the extent to which the level of preparedness ministries / agencies in carrying out its functions as the holder of an administrative authority (what and how the managers manage);
• Exercise of authority treasury (comptable) in the finance ministry (dhi KPPN);
• Factors affecting the implementation of the separation of the two authorities on NAC and KPPN;
• Proposed improvement of rules or procedures to create cost efficiencies and effectiveness in the implementation mechanism of the payment as a form of state financial control.

• Highlighting the extent to which the level of preparedness ministries / agencies in carrying out its functions
• Exercise of authority treasury
• Factors affecting the implementation of the separation of the two authorities on NAC and KPPN

• Fiscal Aggegate Dicipline,
• Budgetary discipline at the national level so that the amount of state expenditures adjusted to the ability to collect revenues
• Allocative Efficiency, efficiency of budget allocation through the proper distribution of financial resources for various government functions in accordance with the outcomes (benefits or outcomes) expected from the implementation of the task of ministry / agency
• Operational Efficiency, efficiency of implementation of the activities of government authorities to produce output according to the duties and functions of government agencies concerned

• Law No.17 of 2003 on State Finance
• Law No.1 of 2004 on State Treasury
• Law No.15 of 2004 on the Audit of the Management and Financial Responsibility of State
• Act 13 of 2005 on State Budget TA.2006
• PP No.21 of 2004 on the Formulation RKAKL
• Presidential Decree No.42 of 2002 jtentang Budget Guidelines
• PMK No.134/PMK.06/2005 Guidelines for the Implementation of the Payment Budget Payment
• Director General of Treasury Regulation No.PER-66/PB/2005 dated 28-12-2005 on payment mechanism at the expense of State Budget Execution

2. Distribution of Authority

Article 19 of Law No.1 of 2004 on State Treasury paragraph (1) states that payment of bills that become a burden the state budget made by the State General Treasurer / Power of Attorney General State Treasurer. In the implementation of payment is carried out by KPPN Budget. Further in paragraph (2) that in implementing the payments referred to in paragraph (1) State General Treasurer / Power of Attorney General Treasurer of State is obliged to:

1. Examine the completeness of payment orders issued by the Budget User / User Authorization Budget;
2. Test the truth of the calculation of the expense of state budget bills that are listed in order of payment;
3. Test the availability of funds is concerned;
4. Ordered the disbursement of funds as the basis for state expenditures;
5. Refuse the disbursement of funds, if the payment order issued by the Budget User / Power User's Budget does not meet the specified requirements.

Payment obligations in the framework of the implementation of these further elaborated in the regulations implementing the Director General of Treasury Regulation No.PER-66/PB/2005 in article 11 as follows:

• Tests carried out by KPPN SPM includes testing that is substantive and formal.
• Substantive tests performed for:
• Test the truth of the calculation of the charges listed in the SPM;
• Test the availability of funds on the activities / sub activities / MAK in DIPA designated in the SPM;
• Test document as the basis for billing (Summary Contract / SPK, decree, Nominative List of Business Travel);
• Testing the statement of responsibility (SPTB) from head office / work units or other designated official of the responsibility for the accuracy of payment;
• Testing the tax invoice and its CNS;

Formal testing conducted to:

• Match the signature of the official signing of SPM with specimen signatures;
• Examine ways of writing / filling in the money in the numbers and letters; verify in writing, including disability should not be there in the writing.

In Article 7 paragraph (2.c.) Law No.1/2004 that the Minister of Finance as General Treasurer of State the authority to control the implementation of the state budget. While the explanation of the Act the Minister of Finance as General Treasurer of State and other officials appointed as Power of Attorney General State Treasurer (KPPN) is not just a cashier who is only authorized to carry out state revenues and expenditures without the right to judge the truth of the receipts and expenditures. Minister of Finance as the State General Treasurer is a financial manager within the meaning completely, ie at the same time serves as a cashier, comptroller, and financial managers.

Financial oversight function here is limited to aspects rechmatigheid and wetmatigheid and only done at the time of receipt or expenditure, so different from the pre-audit functions carried out by technical ministries or post-audit by the apparatus of functional supervision. Thus, it can run one of the principle of internal control is crucial in the process of budget implementation, namely the distinct separation between the holders of administrative authority (ordonnateur) and holder of the authority of the treasury (comptable).


3. Authority Administrative (Ordonateur)

Implementation of administrative authority handed over to the state ministries / institutions. Administrative authority includes conduct of the engagement or other actions that result in state revenues or expenditures, do testing and the imposition of charges filed with the state ministries / institutions with respect to the realization of such engagement, as well as bill payment or receipt of orders that arise as a result of budget execution.

One important fundamental in improving the management of financial ne of the authority and greater responsibility for the state ministries / agencies in managing the programs and activities that exist within the scope of work in which performance-based budgeting will greatly assist in its implementation.

Performance-based budgeting is budgeting done by considering the relationship between funding by the expected outputs and outcomes, including efficiency in achieving outcomes and outputs. Performance indicators (performance indicators) and targets (targets) are part of the development of performance-based budgeting system in order to support improved efficiency and effectiveness of resource utilization.

Performance-based budgeting is basically aimed at improving efficiency in budget execution of any connection between workload and activities of the cost. More deeply, the application of performance-based budgeting will support the budget allocation to priority programs and activities. The system is mainly trying to connect between the output (outputs) with the results (outcomes) with an emphasis on effectiveness and efficiency of the allocated budget. 

• Economical: the extent of inputs / resources are used with the best;
• Efficiency: the extent to which the comparison between the output of an activity with the resources / funds are used;
• Effectiveness: the extent to which output is generated to support the achievement of

Analysis of Management Finance

A. Implementation of Reforms in the Field of Treasury

As known in the field of treasury reforms have consequences on the separation of administrative authority (ordonateur) and the authority of the treasury (comptable). Administrative authority for almost 58 years in the Finance Ministry turned to the Ministry / Department while the Ministry of Finance has the authority treasury. From observations on the implementation of the state budget for 2005 and first quarter of fiscal year 2006 give an idea there are still many obstacles in the implementation of an efficient budget (operational efficeincy).

Actual problems encountered and crucial for the implementation of service functions carried KPPN as the spearhead in the payment of state funds are:

• Aspects of checks and balances (each test) did not work properly as a consequence of the separation of functions comptable orodonateur and function of human resources due to factors not yet ready to execute the mandate of Law No.1/2004
• This way of thinking (mindset) ranks Dit.Jen.Perbendaharaan (Regional Office and KPPN DJPBN) are largely not yet understood that there has been a change in the payment system as stipulated in Law no. 17/2003 and Law No.1/2004 namely the implementation of Performance Based Budgeting system (ABK)
• Still the feeling of releasing a heavy heart that has administrative authority for years and seemed to cling to "bench mark" KPPN that employees in the implementation of payment must perform substantive tests that are sometimes stuck to the formal testing that aspect of the purpose of payment (doelmatigheid). Example: Due to resume writing incomplete contracts KPPN ask for a contract as an examination materials;
• The existence of different interpretations in translating the regulations implementing the resulting ambiguity or gray areas become blank areas and even encourage the one action that leads to a convoluted service. Example: In case of payment of the Non Other Operating Expenditures (BKPK 5212) was listed in SPTB AC Maintenance BKPK which should be included in 5231 and turned out in RKAKL's allocation of funds for maintenance are included in the MAK AC 521 219
• Conflict of understanding of the product rule and other rules pose dilematika products in the implementation of substantive tests on the order of payment example: on article 19, paragraph 2c Act No.1 of 2004 on control of the state budget and article 19 paragraph 2 of the general obligation of the state treasurer and the explanation of the Act where komptabel function not merely as a cashier but included as a comptroller. On the other hand on the Regulation 96/2005 of the Minister of Finance noted that the PIUs as Budget User Authority responsible for implementation of activities supporting the program in accordance with the budget each of which is also poured on the endorsement page of DIPA. This affects the quality of service between KPPN because each has a standard of service based on the interpretation and understanding of those rules
• KPPN shall make Employee Expenditure Control Card Individuals should be an administrative authority and is in the PIU / KPA. This is an inconsistency in the application of the separation ordonateur and comptable.

B. Implementation of the Administrative Authority (Ordonateur) at the NAC

Problems faced in the implementation of administrative functions KPA:

• Problems in the DIPA for example: not available MAK 511 119 (rounding) MAK 511 124 (functional allowance), MAK 511 125 (PPh Ps.21) poses dilematika on KPPN to make payments;
• The existence of euphoria (Let's the manager manage) to make expenditures in accordance with the wishes quibble Operational Directive on activities which essentially is to spend the available funds in the DIPA resulting in interpretations that deviate from the standard chart of accounts

Example

• Employee incentive payments for routine activities
• Functional
• Activity-kegiatn less support the achievement

In the case of procurement of goods and services contracted out to the side that is not skilled in the art

• There is a tendency to procure goods and services with the payment of Money Supply / Supplement to the UP in particular for such self-managed work at the Department of Infrastructure. This can be evidenced by the many requests permission TU with a variety of reasons which essentially is the KPA's reluctance to make direct payments;
• There is a tendency to make changes / additions volume of activity that is essentially for the absorption of funds, with the shift of activities that is difficult to make withdrawals. This indicator can be proved many revisions to the Regional Office DJPBN filings;
• The absence of awareness of the financial manager to make and have regulations on financial management as a guide and reference work, and rely more on consulting to KPPN where ability and mastery of technical regulations that serve the employee is still limited;
• The absence of functional independence of the responsible person (Treasurer, Claims Examiners, and signatories SPM) which are generally structurally subordinate to the civil commitment of the manufacturer (General Head / Head of the General / Head of TU) is in the execution of his work are in control and on the orders or more extreme is the "pressure" fit his boss so there is some reluctance or fear of conflict of interest;
• Still lack the ability to translate the official publisher of SPM in DIPA and RKA-KL and consequently testing billing and charging MAK / MAP is not in accordance with the substance of payment,

Example:
In case of payment of the Non Other Operating Expenditures (BKPK 5212) was listed in SPTB AC Maintenance BKPK which should be included in 5231 and was in RKAKL is the allocation of funds for maintenance are included in the MAK AC 521 219


C. Factors mempegaruhi implementation of the task

a. Factors that support implementation of the task

1. Budget execution data processing done electronically supported by an application program integration;
2. An independent legal existence and have legimitasi the Law No.17 of 2003 on State Finance and Law No.1 of 2004 on State Treasury and other regulations.

b. Factors that hinder the implementation of the tasks

1. The ability of HR to be a major factor due to delays in implementation of tasks in the era of the Information Technology implementation requires the ability to work in the field of data processing (computer) as well as knowledge of treasury authority and knowledge of standard administrative authority;
2. Guidance to KPA should still be partial and coaching and technical assistance carried out komprehensf include aspects otoriasasi, orodonansering, comptable, accounting and data processing;
3. Lack of socialization in the form of QCC to the internal sphere (range DJPBN);
4. The absence of legal protection for the State General Treasurer / BUN Authority to supervise the work units on the user's management of state finances, especially found that there were indications of irregularities or irregularities committed by the KPA;
5. The absence of rewards (reward) and sanctions (punishmen) on employee performance;
6. Facilities and infrastructure in the form of computer devices and network of websites to support the payment system has not adequately considering the existing facility while it is considered obsolete and is not branded.

D. Completion of the Proposed Rules Implementing Authority treasury

From observation of the implementation of financial management of state described above can be concluded there are still weaknesses in particular operational efficiency which feared it would hinder the achievement of goals and objectives of the program. It is therefore necessary corrective measures are as follows:

• Keep the rules as a form of coaching as well as supervision over the management of state finances (post audit) by the State General Treasurer / Power BUN. This means that if there are found indications of irregularities or deviations in the payment order the BUN / BUN remained publishing power SP2D, but need to be developed in writing of the error / deviation with a copy to the regulatory apparatus is functional. Products proposed rule is in the form of the Director General of Treasury Regulations;
• Required continuous extension to the KPA that mind set as the holder of an administrative authority can be understood and impregnated. For that function on the field coaching AKLAP Civics, field patterns need to be reformulated so that the coaching done a truly comprehensive and appropriate according to the reform of financial management of government;
• Keep the rules on service quality standards and KPPN DJPBN Regional Office for the transfer of administrative authority to the KPA can run well;
• With the enforced standards of quality service is necessary to form of compensation in the form of stimulus (incentive) as a reward, and vice versa will be sanctions if there is a breach in service to the partners;
• KPPN no longer need to make the Individual Employee Card Spending Oversight (annex 14-3 PER-66/PB/2005) because it is an administrative authority in the NAC;
• Need for Data Bank Civil Servants throughout Indonesia in order to file civil servants' identity data can be easily accessed by all units in the era of IT users to remember all of the data are processed electronically;
• Competence standard is applied in order to improve the quality of performance, including the scope of the Regional Office Dit.Jen.Perbendaharaan DJPBN and KPPN due to changes in the budgeting system in the era of reform management of the government requires the availability of professionalism and competence in the field of duty;
• Need to accelerate improvement of competence in the field of employee authorization, ordonateur, accounting, reporting and analysis of data processing with the percentage of indicator targets employees who have expertise in the field by conducting on-the-job training (training in the workplace) and GKM with sisitim mentoring;
• Need to be reformulated work procedures and KPPN DJPBN Regional Office in terms of:
• Pattern of development of a comprehensive system of government accounting and data processing integration with the set up a think tank and the Regional Office DUKTEK DJPBN
• Standardization of performance KPPN:

a. Security procedures are applied remain security database
b. Determined the cut-off
c. Formed workshops to address application issues
d. Reconciliation within the framework of the quality standard of service to partners
e. Repair procedures of data




E. Reform Management of Government Finances

Indication of the state budget deviations as found by the Supreme Audit Board (BPK) recently raised concerns among some politicians and the public that the reform of management of government finances apparently still within the limits of political verbalisme. System management of government finances and executive officers are still not able to use public money responsibly. It is ironic in the midst of unemployment and poverty is widespread and growing national debt bloated, corrupt government officials still do not commendable action by misusing public money. Corruptive behavior during the New Order are still strongly attached to some government officials.

CPC's findings raises a fundamental question: What is wrong with the system management of government finances us? If it turns out the system management of government finances we proved to have drawbacks, is there a system of management of government finances are able to suppress alternative diversion and waste of state resources and finances? System management of government finances

What was raised by Sondang P. Siagian (1995) in describing the state of management of government finances during the New Order apparently still has not changed significantly during the Reform Order today. He said that the management of government finances is not in accordance with the demands of development. For example, financial reporting systems, he said ".... often shows only the legality of the use of cost and lack of demonstrated efficiency of the use of those costs. " Financial reporting system which allows distortion of such information must be very bad for decision-making process and effective government policy in the field of management of assets and liabilities (liabilities).

In practice the management of government finances are still going on today, there is a tendency of unscrupulous officials to spend the rest of the budget, both the regular budget and development budget (the project), under its management. The official was motivated by the incentive to spend the rest of the budget because if the rest of the budget is not spent then the amount of the approved budget for the next year the Ministry of Finance, both proposed in the List of Proposed Activities (DUK) and the list of Project Proposal (DUP), will be smaller than the number previous year's budget.

As a result, unscrupulous officials to engineer activities to spend the rest of the budget and make financial statements "that seems right" to justify the activity. In the system management so there are no financial incentives for budget managers to conserve and manage the budget effectively and efficiently.

Weak government management, especially management of finances, the government stimulates such corruptive actions have led to public mistrust of government agencies, especially the supervisory institutions.

When viewed from the state financial management practices, it seems clear the government of using "Cash Accounting System" (Accounting Systems Cash-SAT). Use of this system is confirmed again in the Presidential Decree. 16 of 1994 and the Decree of the Minister of Finance No.. 217/KMK.03/1990.

SAT only posts record revenues and cash expenditures. In the decree is confirmed that, beginning 1 April 1990 the new system applies to all payments at the expense of an extension (APBN) is called a Cash Payment System to be accounted (UYHD). UYHD apparent in the recording system is only done on a cash payment of short-term activities, do not take into account the long-term liabilities.

As is common in bookkeeping and accounting practices of government during this time, the SAT is used by the government does not record the assets and liabilities payable in the form of accounts payable (accounts payable) and accounts receivable (accounts receivable). Therefore, it is unclear and difficult to trace how the value of all assets and liabilities owned by the government.

Consequently, the resulting financial reporting systems tend to provide information that is incomplete and misleading. Such circumstances often make decisions and public policies relating to the assets and liabilities of government, including the management of debt is wrong and ineffective (policy defects). Another weakness of the management of government finances has been the presence of nonbujeter, ie outside the state budget funds derived from non-tax revenues. The existence of appropriations that are nonbujeter whose use is not transparent and weak public accountability mechanisms clearly contrary to the principles of good governance (good governance).

Unlike the SAT, System "Accrual Accounting" (SAA) not only records the value of receipts and cash payments but also records all the values ​​of assets and liabilities are long term. Therefore, the SAA all assets and liabilities the government will be seen and detected. Through a recording of accounts payable and accounts receivable, SAA systematically recorded, in the form of double entries, all assets and liabilities pemerintah.SAA prioritizing the fulfillment principles of transparency, participation and public accountability in the management of state finances and resources.

Implementation Implementation of SAA is a form of good governance in financial management and resources (assets) state. However, the effectiveness of implementation of the SAA can not be separated from what became known in modern public sector management of the New Public Management (NPM) as the corporate management of the government (corporate government). As is known in the world of private business, the NPM was applied to the concept of ownership (ownership), purchase (buyer), shareholder (shareholders), and custtomer (customers). NPM construct governmental organization as a corporation. Community, as a taxpayer (tax payer), is a shareholder of the organization.

Community right to know above all governmental affairs and organizational management, including asset and liability management. Board shall notify the organization in a transparent manner to the community as a shareholder of all things about the organization's assets and liabilities, both short and long term. Minister, as the supreme leader of the organization, should be responsible and accountable to the community about all things concerning the progress and organizational management.

The role and participation in the management of corporate governance is thus to control the use and management of assets and liabilities of the organization. If the board fails to manage the assets and liabilities of the community organization could propose to replace the board or the minister who heads the organization. In NPM the relationship between the Minister and Director-General as CEO (Chief Executive Officer) was realized in the form of Contract Performance (performance contracts) are usually valid for five years. In such contracts, the minister as the representative of the owner (government), can fire the CEO before the expiration of his contract if he failed in managing assets and resources of the organization he leads. Therefore, the CEO will be motivated to manage the assets of the organization is more affective, efficient, and responsible.

However, SAA is not without its flaws. The disadvantage is the relatively high cost of admisitrasi and transactions (transaction cost). In this system each government organization is required to publish their financial statements to the public. That is, it takes a lot of energy auditors (auditor) professionals to prepare and audit the financial statements. In addition, the effectiveness of the SAA in asset management and financial state relies heavily on the moral integrity and professionalism of the operators.

This is where professional auditor, whether he is as an internal and external auditors (internal and external auditors) and government financial managers, play an important role. SAA effectiveness in asset management and government finances have been proved by the Government of New Zealand. The result, the position of the New Zealand Government's budget went from a deficit of $ 2,254 billion in 1990-1991 to a surplus of $ 755 million in 1994 and $ 3,314 million in 1996. SAA has a real contribution in suppressing the wasteful use of the budget while increasing the effectiveness of the budget.

SAA is an alternative financial management system that can be used by the government of Indonesia to reform its financial management. This system has proven capable of managing state assets in an effective, efficient, and responsible. However, the most fundamental thing that the system is working effectively is the government's political will to seriously implement the system in order to realize good governance in government financial management


CONCLUSION

From the description set forth above can be inferred separation of administrative authority and the authority of the treasury still cause problems so that an efficient implementation of the budget as expected with a change in the system yet to be seen clearly.

To think along the direction of reform of the treasury must be guarded according to the achievable goal of creating good governance and it can be achieved if the implementation of the budget refers to three important principles in Public Management Expendiure namely: aggregate fiscal dicipline, Allocative efficiency and operational efficiency.

For it as part of the ranks of the Directorate General of Treasury, the Office of DJPBN should continue to evaluate performance and development of performance in order to respond to changes in all aspects of management of state finances. Amen.

ADVICE

Government financial management system is practiced far less government meets the principles of good governance in the management of state finances. Thereby weakening the financial management system to oversee the use of community participation budget, fishing practices of corruption, collusion, nepotism (KKN) due to lack transparency, and encouraged officials to use state resources and finances are not responsible because of weak mechanism of public accountability in the management of state finances. Therefore, it is necessary to find an alternative government financial management system that meets the principles of good governance in the management of state finances and resources. System "Accrual Accounting" can be one of policy alternatives.