DESPITE ongoing budget reforms triggered by last year’s multibillion flood-control fund scandal, there are still ‘questionable’ lump sum appropriations for infrastructure projects of a government agency in the P7.2-trillion proposed national budget for 2027, Sen. Panfilo M. Lacson said.
Lacson said he will demand an explanation or clarification from the officials concerned, as he flagged some item at the weekend, adding that he may raise the issue at the briefing of the Development Budget Coordination Committee (DBCC), initially scheduled on August 27.
‘We spotted lump-sum appropriations that we don’t think should be lump sum. When we say lump-sum appropriations, an aggregate amount is appropriated for a project, activity or program [PAP], or group of projects without detailing the breakdown of the cost of each PAP,’ he said in English and Filipino in a radio interview.
‘I will seek clarification on the details of these lump sum appropriations. Lump-sum appropriations are allowed for calamity funds because we cannot predict when calamities occur. But it becomes questionable if it’s for infrastructure projects. That is what I saw and I will ask for details on the matter,’ he added.
Lacson and his staff have started poring over the National Expenditure Program (NEP), after it was transmitted to both houses of Congress last week.
He said they will also check the NEP for possible special provisions that may potentially abuse the unprogrammed appropriations. He cited a past General Appropriations Act where the bicameral conference committee at the time added two additional and ‘highly questionable, even unconstitutional Special Provisions.’
Such provisions had included those allowing the executive branch to transfer the funds of government-owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs) such as the Philippine Health Insurance Corp. (PhilHealth) to the national treasury; and Foreign Assisted Projects, ‘which could have been disastrous, if disbursed for purposes other than what it was intended.’ These were removed in subsequent national budgets.
Lacson also reiterated they will maintain the reforms initiated by the Senate and adopted all the way to the bicameral conference committee by then Senate Finance committee chairman and now Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian, including livestreaming the proceedings of the bicameral conference committee and posting online all documents related to the budget process.
This early, he said Finance committee Chairman Jose Victor Ejercito assured him he will not allow insertions in the bicameral conference committee, if they are not in the Senate or House versions of the General Appropriations Bill.
‘I hope this year that under Sen. JV’s chairmanship, he will fulfill his promise not to allow insertions in the bicameral level,’ he said.
Lacson said such a policy would address a longstanding problem in the bicameral conference committee, where provisions that do not appear in either the Senate or House versions of the General Appropriations Bill have, in the past, been inserted during the final stages of the budget process.
Senators have been somewhat split on the matter of ‘insertions,’ with several of them stressing that the ‘insertions’ they were accused of introducing were actually part of their work as people’s representatives, championing urgent, even life-saving initiatives that had long been ignored.
The matter reached a high point last week when Majority Leader Juan Miguel Zubiri took the floor-and was later supported by several peers-and took issue with reports that he was in control of a multibillion ‘Leadership Fund’ that allowed senators to divert funds to pet projects. As then Senate President when the so-called fund alluded to by former Public Works Secretary Manuel Bonoan was introduced, Zubiri said he had been ‘hands off’ specific budget items and directed all requests to the then chairman of the Finance committee.