THE House of Representatives on Tuesday opened plenary deliberations on the proposed P7.2-trillion national budget for 2027, with lawmakers questioning how much of the spending plan Congress can control.
Party-list Rep. and Minority Leader Marcelino C. Libanan said the budget should be examined beyond the size of its allocations, including the amount subject to congressional discretion and the safeguards governing public funds.
Nueva Ecija Rep. and House Appropriations Committee Chairperson Mikaela Angela B. Suansing said P4.494 trillion of the proposed budget consists of programmed appropriations, while P2.706 trillion is automatic appropriations.
“On the part of Congress, in the General Appropriations bill, we are unable to touch the automatic appropriations, so we are looking at the P4.494 trillion under programmed appropriations,” she said.
Mr. Libanan also pointed to the proposed P1.114 trillion in interest payments, which exceeds the P976-billion allocation for the Department of Education, and asked whether Congress could continue protecting education’s constitutional priority as automatic obligations rise.
He further called for specific line items where spending can reasonably be identified in advance. Ms. Suansing agreed, saying, “where possible, we would prefer specific line items over lump-sum amounts.”
She cited the P45.67-billion National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund as an example where lump-sum funding is necessary because the timing and scale of calamities cannot be predicted.
The question of congressional control over appropriations was later illustrated by an exchange between Ms. Suansing and Caloocan Rep. Edgar R. Erice over the proposed P58-billion local government support fund (LGSF).
Mr. Erice questioned whether the fund gives the Executive broad discretion over which local governments receive funding, calling it a potential presidential “pork barrel.”
Ms. Suansing said requests are evaluated by the Department of Budget and Management based on parameters and a spending menu approved by Congress, which Mr. Erice said allows “almost everything.”
Ms. Suansing cited the Supreme Court’s Belgica v. Secretary of Budget and Management ruling, saying the LGSF’s purpose, standards and conditions sufficiently limit Executive discretion.
Mr. Erice also questioned why the LGSF could fund projects covered by DPWH programs, which Ms. Suansing argued, remained eligible because they are included in the Congress-approved menu. — Pexcel John Bacon