Li Jinhua, China¡¯s auditor-general of the National Audit Office, made public a new list of government departments involved in public fund misuse in his report to the Standing Committee of the National People¡¯s Congress at the end of June. While last year¡¯s list from Li¡¯s office impressed the public with the auditor-general¡¯s determination to fight against corruption, this year¡¯s list has made people focus more on the report itself.

College overcharging

An article by Zhang Guifeng in the China Youth Daily highlights the section in the auditing report which says that 18 major universities and colleges in China have overcharged students a total of 868 million yuan (US$105 million) last year.

Overcharging by universities and colleges have topped a list of price-related complaints lately, but there is no specific information about how many higher education institutions are involved and how much has been overcharged. Recently some experts estimated that in the past decade, excess educational charges could have reached 200 billion yuan (US$24 billion). Related departments immediately dismissed the figure as exaggerated, insisting that overcharging is a problem with only a handful of schools and universities.

However, as the auditors have revealed, 18 universities and colleges have levied excess charges amounting to 868 million yuan in one year ¡ª an average of nearly 50 million yuan (US$6 million) each. The figure would have been staggering if the auditing had been expanded to cover middle schools and primary schools.

Only 19 universities and colleges ¡ª all of them well-known higher learning institutions in China ¡ª are on the auditing list, yet 18 have been found to be overcharging. There is no way the public can be talked into believing that overcharging is a problem with just a few universities and colleges.

It is said that the Ministry of Education has already started to probe into the overcharging issue. We hope they can give the public a convincing response and effective measures can be taken.

Publicity on punishment

An article in the Shanghai-based Youth Daily says that in addition to making the names of departments involved in public fund misuse known to the public, more attention should be paid to punishment.

Starting from the year 2003, the National Audit Office, while reporting to the Standing Committee of the National People¡¯s Congress, has also informed the general public of its auditing results. However, it is a pity that some departments which were on the blacklist last year have not been disciplined ¡ª some have even been caught with fresh violations again this year.

Li and his office should not be blamed for that. It is the job of supervisory departments and public prosecutors to discipline and punish the relevant departments. Unfortunately, the public have no idea how last year¡¯s listed departments have been handled.

The publication of the auditing results is a realization of the public¡¯s right to information, and punishment of relevant departments guarantees the public¡¯s right to supervision.