Should the government ban insertions in its annual budget to prevent corruption, especially in big-ticket infrastructure projects?
That’s the proposal of Senator Panfilo Lacson, as he sees them as the root of systemic corruption in government spending, particularly in flood control programs.
He calls congressional insertions the “original sin” behind the multi-billion peso flood control scam.
He argues that these insertions create opportunities for corrupt officials in the Department of Public Works and Highways to misuse public funds.
Once inserted into the budget, these funds often end up in the hands of district engineering offices, where they become vulnerable to kickbacks and ghost projects.
The senator wants both houses of Congress to agree not to meddle in infrastructure allocations, saying lawmakers should focus only on institutional amendments.
He emphasized that unprogrammed appropriations – often used for flood control – are particularly susceptible to abuse.
As chair of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, Lacson is leading a probe into the flood control scandal, where whistleblower Brice Hernandez linked Senators Joel Villanueva and Jinggoy Estrada to questionable insertions worth ₱600M and ₱355M, respectively.
Lacson has not cleared either senator, citing budget documents that validate the allegations.
His proposal is part of a broader effort to restore public trust and prevent future misuse of taxpayer money.
He’s also coordinating with the Independent Commission for Infrastructure, created by President Marcos Jr., to investigate anomalies in public works projects.
Lacson’s stance reflects a deeper call for self-restraint within Congress and a shift toward transparent, accountable budgeting.
The proposed ban on budget insertions fits into the broader history of pork barrel reforms in the Philippines, and what kind of systemic shift it might trigger.
The Priority Development Assistance Fund was a discretionary fund given to lawmakers to finance local projects. It was abolished in 2013 after the Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional in a landmark decision.
The PDAF scandal, exposed by a whistleblower, revealed how billions of pesos were funneled into fake NGOs linked to businesswoman Janet Lim-Napoles and complicit lawmakers.
Despite PDAF’s abolition, lawmakers continued to influence budgets through insertions, often during bicameral committee meetings.
These insertions are typically hidden in unprogrammed appropriations, which are standby funds released only when excess revenues or loans materialize. Critics argue these lack transparency and function as “pork barrel in disguise.”
The Department of Budget and Management, however, defends unprogrammed funds as legitimate tools for contingency planning, citing strict release conditions and oversight mechanisms.
Given this, do you think Sen. Lacson’s proposal will see the light of day?
