Old pork, new labels

On 12 October 2026, the House of Representatives passed the P7.2-trillion 2027 national budget with an overwhelming majority. While the lawmakers celebrated, civil society groups raised serious concerns about corruption and political patronage.

The People’s Budget Coalition flagged over P1 trillion in vulnerable funds, dividing them into three categories: “soft pork” for social aid; “hard pork” for infrastructure; and “shadow pork” for unprogrammed funds.

Separately, Social Watch Philippines identified P427 billion that would be prone to political abuse, covering everything from roads and medical assistance to local government subsidies.

These findings show that political patronage and greed still shape budget allocations despite the public outrage and government investigations.

The most alarming issue is the sudden appearance of new projects after the President submitted the original budget proposal. The People’s Budget Coalition and BetterGov.ph reported that nearly 7,000 projects worth roughly P190 billion were added secretly by the House.

These hidden additions lack any original entries or public documentation, especially within the public works, agriculture, health and irrigation sectors.

The core problem is no longer whether Congress has the legal power to amend the budget. It clearly does. The real problem is that billions in taxpayer money are being reallocated behind closed doors without any transparency, justification or public tracking.

Budget insertions, however, are not illegal, and Congress has the right to adjust the budget to meet real public needs.

The real danger is how these funds are allocated and used. With the 2028 elections coming up, the massive amounts of money set aside for infrastructure and social aid look less like public service and more like political campaign funds taken from taxpayers.

During the 2025 flood control controversy, Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla labeled then-Speaker Martin Romualdez as the “mastermind” of budget corruption. Romualdez fired back, arguing that a single lawmaker could not control the entire budget because it goes through a multistep system involving the executive branch and Congress.

Yet, the same questionable insertions remained after Romualdez lost the speakership and was arrested on plunder charges in September 2026. If he, with the help of Zaldy Co, engineered the budget bloat, why did it continue after them?

The truth is the budget relies on a structural connivance between the Palace and Congress.

For instance, watchdogs like PCIJ and BetterGov.ph flagged the infrastructure allocation for Ilocos Norte’s First District, represented by the President’s son, Sandro Marcos.

The House increased his district’s funding from a modest P369.4 million in the original proposal to a staggering P4.74 billion. The Palace immediately defended the insertion, implying a possible backroom deal with the House.

Romualdez’s arrest does not clear him of the plunder charges. But the persistence of questionable insertions weakens Remulla’s single-mastermind theory and proves that budget corruption is systemic, not a one-man operation.

Grand corruption is not a one-person scheme. It thrives when political leaders exploit vague budget rules to reward allies and protect their power. Alliances may shift, but the system, as well as the greed it enables, remains.

The Supreme Court’s October 2026 ruling exposed the danger of excessive discretion in unprogrammed funds. By banning lump sums and limiting hidden increases, it closed a major loophole. But watchdogs warn that discretionary spending has already resurfaced in the 2027 budget as social aid, local projects and undocumented insertions.

President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s gamble to arrest his cousin, former Speaker Romualdez, has backfired. While Marcos used his July 2026 State of the Nation Address to champion the anti-corruption cases to restore public trust, the political dividend never arrived.

Instead, widespread public discontent remains severe, as reflected in devastating survey numbers from September and October 2026. WR Numero and Momentum Research reported high dissatisfaction ratings at 65 percent and 60.4 percent, respectively.

The 2027 budget controversy shows that the problem goes beyond a few officials. Even after Romualdez’s removal and Zaldy Co’s flight, the House budget remains bloated with unexplained insertions that sharply depart from the original National Expenditure Program.

As the budget heads to the Senate and the bicameral conference committee, the public must demand full transparency. If these questionable funds remain or reappear under new names, one truth becomes clear: There was no single mastermind; the system itself is broken.