The proposed national budget for 2027 stands at P7.2 trillion, a figure one economist says clings to an old growth story the government has already abandoned.

Growth targets have been slashed, gutted by a corruption scandal and battered further by a Middle East conflict that sent fuel prices into the stratosphere.

The multiagency Development Budget Coordination Committee (DBCC) now pegs 2027 growth at 5 to 6 percent, down from the administration’s original medium-term target of 6.5 to 8 percent.

Zy-za Nadine Suzara, an independent public budget analyst and an amicus curiae at the recent Supreme Court consultations on petitions challenging the pilfering of the national budget, cited a disconnect between the budget’s scale and its stunted goals.

As she put it, the gross domestic product (GDP) target kept declining each year because the Marcos administration failed to meet it.

The growth assumption behind next year’s record P7.2-trillion proposal has since been cut to roughly 3.5 percent.

Her question, thus, is “ano ngayon... para saan ‘yung budget?” What, now, is the budget actually for?

Suzara’s specific worry is that the budget level remained unchanged despite unmet development goals, causing the growth target to keep falling.

The implication is that spending increases while expectations for its actual economic contribution shrink.

Her question about where the public money will go can be answered in 2027, which is a pre-election year.

Suzara indicated that the central question for 2027 is not “how much” will be spent but where it should go, or what the strategic priorities are if the government exercises its role to fix the economy by investing in sectors that would stimulate growth.

The Palace has failed to present a 2027 growth strategy to justify its huge proposal.

The absence of a discernible development roadmap in the twilight years of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s presidency is reflected in the stunting incidence among school-age children, which affects their learning proficiency.

Suzara’s blunt assessment is that the deadly combination of poor investments in education and a lack of healthcare support is destroying the nation’s future.

“Saan na tayo pupulutin?” (Where does that leave us?)

The money spent is not being measured by its social effects or by whether the projects actually improve the public welfare.

“Only some of these programs are being evaluated thoroughly,” Suzara lamented.

While she did not mention it, the bulk of the social response to any crisis the government faces is the infusion of cash doles or “ayuda.”

Suzara described the failure to examine the impact of public spending as creating a “black hole,” where enormous sums disappear.

The growth assumption has collapsed; the budget hasn’t adjusted to that collapse, so the strategic logic for where the money should go becomes a mystery.

The government also has no real mechanism to confirm whether any of the money is being spent effectively.

Suzara repeated the question that weighs on many taxpayers, particularly middle-income earners who shoulder much of the government’s tax burden: Where does my money go?

With the historic 2027 spending proposal, anxiety is high over the budget mystery.