DBM on DPWH budget: Approved in good faith

The Department of Budget and Management (DBM) clarified Thursday that it had relied on good faith that submissions by the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) had undergone proper technical review prior to approval.

Budget Secretary Amenah Pangandaman said in a radio interview that the DBM would review DPWH’s proposed budget in the 2026 National Expenditure Program (NEP), following President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s directive to reassess the agency’s allocations due to reported anomalies, including duplicate projects and copy-pasted costs.

“So, when it reaches the central office, our understanding is that all of it has already undergone thorough review by their people on the ground. Again, we don’t have the capacity to question or verify why this one costs 100 million, another 150 million, or 130 million. That’s really beyond us,” Pangandaman said.

“To repeat, they submitted 700 pages with more than 15,000 line items. We don’t even have a single engineer in our office. So, we acted in good faith—trusting that they studied it carefully, that they had a plan, proper planning, and that their budget was well-prepared. Unfortunately, it turns out, that wasn’t the case,” she added.

Pangandaman confirmed she had already met with newly appointed DPWH Secretary Vince Dizon to discuss how the line-by-line budget review will proceed.

“Secretary Vince will now lead his department in reviewing the projects, and together we will go through them line by line,” she said.

She also expressed dismay over reports that projects in the districts of Antipolo Rep. Roberto Puno and Marikina Rep. Marcelino Teodoro were marked as completed even though they were not aligned with official priorities.

Copy-pasted projects revealed

Former senator Panfilo “Ping” Lacson earlier revealed that at least 88 items in the 2026 budget had P150 million each in allocation, 373 had P100 million, and 11 had P120 million each—raising suspicions of duplication and templated budgeting.

Pangandaman acknowledged that the DBM’s limited technical expertise hinders a deeper review of DPWH’s project proposals, though some copy-pasted items were identified and flagged.

“So that’s what happened—we raised those concerns and were able to catch them. We wrote to them, and they responded, saying some were part of phase 1, others phase 2, and some were under calamity projects. For the rest, they went ahead and made corrections, replaced what needed fixing, and added the necessary details. We respected that since they know their own nomenclatures best,” she said.

‘Very difficult to scrutinize’

Pangandaman compared DPWH’s budget to those of other departments, saying the latter are easier to track and monitor.

“Because their projects are quite specific, it’s easy to see and track how they are being implemented. Very easy to spot, in fact. But with the DPWH, since there are so many line items that really require professional expertise to evaluate, it’s very difficult for us to scrutinize them,” she said.

To strengthen internal safeguards, Pangandaman said the DBM plans to implement systems that can automatically detect duplicated or vague project entries. The department will also require DPWH to submit detailed engineering designs and programs of work with every budget proposal.

She added that an internal probe may be launched to check for potential collusion within the DBM.

“We will investigate within the DBM itself to determine if there are ‘mafia’ accomplices inside the department,” Pangandaman said.