House gives itself P5-B budget boost

Navotas City Rep. Toby Tiangco has questioned the nearly P5-billion increase in the House of Representatives’ proposed 2027 budget, calling for greater transparency and the same fiscal scrutiny that lawmakers demand from other government agencies.

Tiangco questioned why the House was increasing its own allocation while legislators were urging government agencies to exercise fiscal discipline and account for every peso in public funds.

The House’s proposed budget rose to P22.6 billion in the chamber’s version of the General Appropriations Bill (GAB) from the P17.6236 billion in the National Expenditure Program (NEP) submitted by the executive branch.

The P4.98-billion represented a 28-percent increase in the House budget which accounts for 0.07 percent of the proposed P7.2-trillion national budget.

A significant portion of the increase was earmarked for maintenance and other operating expenses (MOOE), which was increased by P1.95 billion — from P10.9 billion in the NEP to P12.89 billion in the House version.

The expanded allocation includes an additional P658 million for other maintenance and operating expenses and P457.23 million for travel.

Tiangco has called for the publication of the budget allocations per district on the House website and a pre-plenary review of the chamber’s proposed budget to allow lawmakers and the public to scrutinize the figures before its approval.

His motion to reopen deliberations on the congressional budget was denied on procedural grounds, however.

The lawmaker also questioned the absence of a complete, itemized breakdown explaining where the additional funds would go, which offices or programs would receive them, and what public benefits they would deliver.

The MOOE covers the operating requirements of government offices, including supplies, utilities, communications, travel and repairs. For lawmakers, these funds support official legislative and constituency work and are subject to government accounting and auditing rules.

Other minority lawmakers have also raised concerns about the House’s spending priorities and the transparency of the budget amendment process.

Kamanggagawa Partylist Rep. Eli San Fernando said the proposed budget failed to address the needs of ordinary Filipinos and lacked transparency, describing the proceedings of the Budget Amendments and Review Subcommittee (BARSc) as “scripted.”

House Deputy Minority Leader and ACT Teachers Rep. Antonio Tinio earlier described the broader 2027 national spending plan as a “blatant case of misprioritization,” arguing that social services were being cut even as allocations for defense and infrastructure were increased.

Tinio also questioned the distribution of congressional district allocations, claiming that some districts received more than P11 billion in projects while others received little or none.

Defensive House leaders

But House leaders have defended the amendment process, maintaining that it was open and inclusive.

House Appropriations Committee Chair Mikaela Suansing said amendments would not be made without public deliberations. The BARSc also included representatives of all political parties, including the minority bloc.

The controversy comes amid broader questions about the documentation and auditing of congressional expenditures.

The Commission on Audit (CoA) has the constitutional authority to examine government revenues and expenditures, including those of the legislative branch. Members of Congress are subject to government accounting and auditing rules.

Legislators may endorse projects or facilitate their inclusion in the national budget, but implementing agencies and local government units are responsible for procurement, disbursement, delivery, inspection and accounting.

The House has also been scrutinized over its budget amendments at a time when other government offices, including the Office of the Vice President, have faced CoA audit observations and notices of disallowance over questioned expenditures.

The nearly P5-billion budget increase does not, by itself, establish wrongdoing, but the lack of a detailed public accounting has raised questions about whether the additional allocation is justified.