Imee Marcos explains ‘giniling’ remark on 2026 budget

Senator Imee Marcos has clarified her earlier controversial remark describing portions of the proposed 2026 national budget as “giniling,” saying her criticism was directed at what she views as misplaced priorities and questionable insertions made during congressional deliberations.

Marcos made the clarification during a recent interview on DZRH, explaining that the term — Filipino slang suggesting funds were minced or mixed — referred to allocations she believes lack transparency and justification.

The senator has been a vocal critic of the budget ratified in December 2024 and refused to sign the bicameral conference committee report on the P6.35-trillion General Appropriations Act. She has publicly described the measure as “mangled” and “corrupt,” pointing to alleged dubious insertions and bloated items, particularly in infrastructure spending under the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH).

While acknowledging increased allocations for key social sectors such as education, health, and agriculture, Marcos singled out the Department of Education budget for classroom construction. She noted that despite allocations ballooning to about P85 billion, actual implementation lagged, with only a fraction of planned classrooms completed in the previous year. She stressed that her concern lay in efficiency and execution rather than the importance of education itself.

Marcos also challenged reallocations related to DPWH, noting that budget deliberations for 2026 have exposed sharp disagreements between the Senate and the House over cuts and pricing adjustments. These disputes intensified following revelations of alleged overpricing and “ghost” projects in infrastructure spending.

She particularly criticized the increase in funding for farm-to-market roads, which doubled from earlier committee estimates, arguing that such projects have sometimes served interests beyond genuine public use. Some senators have referred to these reallocations as “farm-to-market to-pocket roads.”

Under the proposed 2026 budget, responsibility for many farm-to-market roads has been transferred from DPWH to the Department of Agriculture, with an allocation of about P33.9 billion for the construction and rehabilitation of rural roads aimed at improving the transport of agricultural produce.

Marcos also raised concerns about irrigation systems and dikes, saying many damaged or obsolete facilities remain unrepaired and may be turned over to other agencies. She linked these issues to broader concerns about delayed infrastructure and disaster resilience, which have been highlighted in ongoing Senate probes into alleged waste and corruption in DPWH flood control spending.

Another major point of contention was the insertion of a P10-billion Presidential Assistance to Farmers fund, which Marcos said was added late in the budget process without clear guidelines on beneficiaries or implementation.

“Hindi natin pinagkakait ang tulong sa magsasaka kasi talagang malubha na ang sitwasyon nila, pero ang tanong — sino nanaman magbibigay niyan?” she said, questioning accountability and transparency in the distribution of the fund.

Marcos also criticized how some health allocations were structured. She warned that programs for indigent care, free medicines, and broader hospital access could be sidelined if funds are channeled primarily into construction projects that may be better handled by local government units or the Department of Health.