The House of Representatives’ contingent to the bicameral conference committee warned Tuesday that up to one million beneficiaries of the Medical Assistance for Indigents and Financially Incapacitated Patients (MAIFIP) could be deprived of much-needed support if the Senate succeeds in cutting its allocation below P49.2 billion in the proposed 2026 budget.

House Committee on Appropriations Chair Mikaela Suansing raised the alarm amid divergent positions between the House and the Senate on whether to increase MAIFIP funding to P51.6 billion, as agreed in principle on the first day of the bicameral conference committee meeting last week.

“In 2025, the number of beneficiaries given the GAA (General Appropriations Act) amount of P41.2 billion was 3.3 million beneficiaries. If the House version (of the MAIFIP 2026 budget) is not adopted, this would reduce the number of beneficiaries by 1.1 million. That’s how strong the potential impact is,” Suansing said, adding that the reduction would particularly affect the poor and disadvantaged.

The P51.6-billion allocation agreed upon in the bicam discussions is significantly higher than the P24.23 billion proposed by Malacañang under the National Expenditure Program.

The Senate’s bicameral contingent had earlier reached a compromise with the House, which initially proposed P49.2 billion for MAIFIP, to raise the allocation to P51.6 billion, even as the Senate’s own proposal stood at only P29 billion.

However, the agreement remains only in principle and has yet to be reflected in the final bicam report. The sharp proposed increase has triggered concerns among some lawmakers and budget watchdogs, with critics branding MAIFIP as the new face of “pork” in the health sector due to the discretionary nature of the funds.

MAIFIP is a Department of Health program that provides financial assistance to indigent and financially incapacitated patients to help cover medical expenses.

Critics have argued that MAIFIP risks becoming vulnerable to political patronage that rewards influence and connections, and, more importantly, undermines the Universal Health Care (UHC) Act, which seeks to limit discretion and guarantee automatic access to health services.

Lawmakers from both chambers who are not members of the bicameral committee have strongly objected to the proposed funding increase, instead pushing for the realignment of funds directly to the health system or public hospitals.

Contrary to the position of some of her colleagues, Deputy Speaker Kristine Singson-Meehan said MAIFIP does not undermine but rather “strengthens” the implementation of the UHC law by filling critical gaps, such as cases where insurance coverage, including PhilHealth, is insufficient or unavailable.

She also assured that hospitals, whether public or private, will be guaranteed reimbursement for emergency cases.

“Maintaining strong MAIFIP funding supports UHC by ensuring that no patient is denied care due to cost,” said Singson-Meehan, a member of the bicameral committee.

Palawan Rep. Jose Alvarez and Negros Occidental Rep. Javi Benitez also backed the retention of MAIFIP and the proposed funding increase, assuring that all MAIFIP funds will “go straight to hospitals” once bills are forwarded to them.

Benitez said issues of patronage stem from “limited resources,” while Alvarez guaranteed that MAIFIP allocations will never be coursed through politicians.