A certain solon somewhere in Metro Manila is reportedly charging the salaries of some staff members and consultants to a local government unit (LGU).

The arrangement has raised eyebrows because lawmakers already receive substantial Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) allocations — reportedly about P55 million annually, or roughly P4.5 million a month. Those funds are generally intended to cover office operations, personnel, constituent services, travel, training and other official expenses.

If those reports are accurate, observers naturally ask why staff salaries would instead be charged to an LGU. Some speculate the arrangement could free up portions of the congressional MOOE for other legitimate expenditures. Others question whether the same category of expenses could effectively be funded from two public sources. Either way, the issue raises legitimate questions about transparency and accountability in the use of public funds.

The House of Representatives’ MOOE reportedly reached P18.58 billion in 2026, up from P10.75 billion previously. Spread across 317 lawmakers and other House offices, the allocations average more than P55 million annually per office. These expenditures are generally subject to Commission on Audit rules and liquidation requirements.

Rep. Leandro Leviste has said, however, that some MOOE expenses may be “liquidated by certification” — a process in which certifications, rather than receipts, are accepted for certain expenditures. He argued that such a system could be vulnerable to abuse if not properly monitored.

Public finance experts note that if an LGU assumes expenses ordinarily expected to be covered by another office’s budget, it may place additional pressure on local resources that could otherwise be allocated to barangay projects, health services and other community programs.

That naturally raises several questions. Is an LGU being asked to subsidize the operations of a congressional office? If so, is the arrangement authorized under existing laws and regulations? And are taxpayers being given a full accounting of how both national and local funds are being spent?

If established, such practices could undermine the intended purpose of MOOE allocations and weaken public confidence in government accountability.

Taxpayers deserve clear answers whenever questions arise over the use of public funds. After all, transparency is not merely good governance — it is the price of public trust.