I'm not sure where you got the impression that problems such as $300 million in fabricated sales, or $5 billion in undisclosed debt which were missed in audits is an issue with external scrutiny.

My post is specifically pointing out that the wording makes it sound like EY audited the companies and their findings are what caused the companies to implode, which is what the parent comment seemed to assume, but the article actually says that it was the fact that EY did not find problems during their audits, which were later found, causing companies to implode.