Senate President Pro Tempore Panfilo “Ping” Lacson revealed on Sunday that almost every senator in the 19th Congress was involved in budget insertions for 2025, describing the scale as “unprecedented.”

Lacson disclosed that he had reviewed documents showing billions of pesos worth of insertions in both the National Expenditure Program (NEP) and during bicameral deliberations.

“I saw a document listing how much was inserted, at least initially at the Senate level, and the figures were staggering,” Lacson said. “It was massive, unprecedented. I can say that in the 19th Congress, almost all were involved.”

Lacson revealed that Senate insertions alone in the 2025 budget reached more than P100 billion.

“It was humongous. I have never seen such amounts. Before the Priority Development Assistance Fund was declared unconstitutional in 2013, ‘pork’ amounted to hundreds of millions. Now it’s at least P100 billion total for 24 senators alone,” he said.

While Lacson has yet to scrutinize the list of House members, he noted that the list of representatives who made similar insertions is also long.

“At the budget deliberation, I can ask why these insertions were allowed,” he continued. “In scrutinizing the budget, especially in the plenary, I want to know how many of the insertions were released and how they were implemented,” he added.

Lacson added that he had shown the document to Senate President Vicente “Tito” Sotto III. He clarified, however, that not all insertions were implemented, as many were vetoed in the final General Appropriations Act (GAA), while others were classified “for later release.”

“If those insertions had gone through, it would have been more than a hundred billion pesos,” he noted.

The veteran lawmaker, who also chairs the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, pointed to the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) for allowing unprogrammed funds to be released for flood control projects.

“There is negligence [on the part of DBM]. How did unprogrammed appropriations get tapped and funneled into infrastructure projects, many handled directly by district engineering offices?” he said.

Lacson stressed that while insertions or amendments per se are not necessarily illegal, they are questionable, especially if individual insertions amount to P5 billion or even P9 billion.

Such insertions could threaten the economy because the withheld or diverted funds could have gone to infrastructure programs that were planned and vetted at the barangay, city and regional levels, he said.

The issue has become central in the Senate’s ongoing probe into an alleged racket involving flood control funds.

Former Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) undersecretary Roberto Bernardo earlier testified, implicating Senators Francis Escudero, Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr., and Nancy Binay, as well as Commission on Audit commissioner Mario Lipana, DepEd undersecretary Trygve Olaivar, and Ako Bicol Partylist Rep. Zaldy Co.

Gaps, clarifications

Lacson said gaps remain in the testimonies. “Some of my colleagues feel that information is incomplete. We will recall Bernardo, as he was open to clarifying, and we will also seek clarifications from Guteza,” he said. He added that some witnesses may have withheld details pending documentary evidence.

The Blue Ribbon Committee is working closely with the Department of Justice on the possible admission of individuals into the Witness Protection Program.

While some are under Senate custody, Lacson noted that Bernardo was not cited for contempt and remained free, albeit under protective arrangements with the DoJ.

Questions have also been raised about the validity of notarized affidavits submitted by witnesses. Lacson said the matter has been referred to the Executive Judge of Manila, who has jurisdiction over investigating irregularities in notarized documents.

“If it is proven that Guteza lied about appearing before a notary public, then his testimony as a whole could be cast in doubt,” Lacson warned.

Pressed on specific allegations, Lacson said he would verify Bernardo’s claim that he personally delivered money to former senator and now Makati City Mayor Nancy Binay. “If that is accurate, then it is a direct testimony against her, unlike the others,” he said.

On House Speaker Martin Romualdez’s claim that some witness testimonies were politically motivated or coached, Lacson said: “I leave that to your judgment. It has already gone viral, and the public can draw their own conclusions.”

Appeal

He added that the Senate may formally write to the House leadership to request the voluntary appearance of lawmakers, including Romualdez and Co, to answer allegations.

“Inter-parliamentary courtesy applies between the two chambers. We cannot directly summon House members, but if they volunteer, as Rep. Toby Tiangco [did], we can allow it,” he said.

The senator reiterated his call to fellow lawmakers to practice self-restraint in inserting appropriations for locally funded infrastructure projects not just in the DPWH but in other agencies like the Department of Education and the Department of Transportation, whose budgets include infrastructure projects.

He, likewise, appealed to fellow lawmakers not to avail of the so-called “leadership fund” in the DPWH that allows lawmakers to insert projects at the level of the National Expenditure Program.