The long-awaited 2026 National Budget was ratified by the House of Representatives in less than a minute on Monday, drawing criticism from several lawmakers who questioned the speed of the process.

The ratification of the P6.793 trillion budget for fiscal year 2026 was carried out through a loud chorus of “ayes,” comparable to applause after a vote. However, viewers of the House livestream noted voices calling for the attention of the presiding chair even as the measure was swiftly approved.

Following the vote, some lawmakers expressed disappointment over what they described as a rushed ratification process.

House Deputy Minority Leader and Mamamayang Liberal Party-list Rep. Leila De Lima posted on X to express surprise and frustration over the immediate approval of the bicameral conference committee report.

“Anong Pasabog ito? Bakit ura-urada ang pag-ratify sa Bicam Committee Report? Nakakadismaya!,” she posted.

According to De Lima’s camp, the lawmaker would have explained her “no” vote had she been given the opportunity to speak on the floor. She said the historic livestreaming of bicameral deliberations fell short of genuine reform.

“Transparency becomes hollow when what it merely broadcasts is the return of opaque, discretionary, and patronage-driven spending. Partial or selective transparency, when used to fool than to enlighten, is even more dangerous than pure opaqueness,” De Lima said in her supposed speech.

She cited the continued inclusion of unprogrammed appropriations (UA) as one of the main reasons for opposing the budget, noting that the bicameral committee adopted the House version amounting to P243 billion.

“But this is not merely a question of amounts. UAs should not merely be reduced or zeroed, they should be removed entirely. UAs have no place in the GAA.”

De Lima also flagged increases in what she described as “soft pork” or patronage-heavy programs, saying these were even higher than allocations in the House General Appropriations Bill version.

She cited programs including Assistance to Individuals in Crisis Situations (P63.9 billion), Medical Assistance to Indigent and Financially Incapacitated Patients (P51 billion), and Tulong Panghanapbuhay sa Ating Disadvantaged/Displaced Workers estimated at P22 billion.

She further questioned the P12 billion in confidential and intelligence funds, noting a P1.049 billion increase from the National Expenditure Program that was not deliberated during livestreamed bicam sessions.

“Confidential and Intelligence Funds increased by ₱1.049 billion from the NEP to the final Bicam report. Such funds were even given to agencies with no primary security mandate. Bakit binibigyan ng “secret funds” ang DENR, DSWD, BIR, at ang Bureau of Customs? Bakit maging ang ARTA, na dating zero (0), biglang nagkaroon ng ₱6.7 milyon?,” she said.

Davao third district Rep. Isidro Ungab also voted against the budget, citing steep cuts in foreign-assisted projects under the Department of Public Works and Highways.

Ungab said the DPWH foreign-assisted projects budget was slashed from P70 billion to P17.7 billion, a reduction equivalent to P82.3 billion from the P100 billion NEP level. He pointed to deep cuts in transport projects, including the Metro Manila Subway and the North–South Commuter Railway, warning that these reductions would delay key infrastructure projects.

Kabataan Party-list Rep. Renee Co also raised concerns even before the ratification, saying lawmakers were given copies of the bicam report only hours before the session.

“Pinagbibigyan ng ilang araw ang pagplantsa sa mga gusot at deadlock ng mga politiko sa bicam, pero minamadali naman ang pag-apruba ng publiko. Mas marami pang araw ang naubos sa behind-the-scenes negotiations kaysa sa bukas na pagkilatis ng publiko sa mahahalagang dokumento,” Co said.

“Clearly, this proves that livestreaming is theater and transparency is a gimmick for the Marcos admin. So much for open bicam. Left in the dark pa rin ang mamamayang Pilipino sa buong proseso,” she added.

Co also said pork barrel allocations remained in the budget, citing the P8 billion Support to Barangay Development Program while education funding lagged.

“Ang 4% GDP allotment sa education na pinagmamalaki ng Pangulo ay literal na sabit lang sa minimum international standards. Hindi flex ang paghabol ng pogi points sa foreign bodies kung sa totoo langnapag-iiwanan ang batayang pangangailangan ng mga estudyante,” she said.

Davao First District Rep. Paolo Duterte also voted against the measure, saying he could not support a budget filled with unresolved issues.

“The mastermind behind the corruption of the 2025 budget has not even been jailed yet — yet here we are again, with a new budget in 2026 ready to be plundered. That is not reform. That is repetition,” Duterte said.

“A national budget should serve the people, not reward impunity. Transparency must come before approval, not after public outrage,” he added.

Meanwhile, Akbayan Partylist said the restoration of unprogrammed appropriations showed that old practices persisted despite public scrutiny.

“While there were important gains, largely driven by public vigilance and sustained advocacy, the final budget fell short of what this extraordinary moment demands. It succumbed to old habits. It was a missed opportunity,” Akbayan said.