MALACANANG on Monday said President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. was not initially aware of the alleged P100-billion worth of individual insertions in the 2025 national budget, but is now determined to uncover questionable allocations, particularly those tied to flood control projects.
Meanwhile, Senate President Pro Tempore Panfilo Lacson said the budget insertions were part of Congress’ mandate, but abused by lawmakers, with some allegedly colluding with public works officials for personal gain from infrastructure projects.
Presidential Communications Office (PCO) Undersecretary Claire Castro made the remark following revelations by Lacson that nearly all members of the 19th Congress made their own insertions into the 2025 General Appropriations Act (GAA).
“If this was already exposed and laid out by Senator Lacson, that is precisely what the President wants to oppose,” Castro said in a press briefing.
“It is also the reason why investigations are now being conducted into anomalous flood control projects,” she added.
Castro explained that the President was not privy to the specific insertions during the drafting and passage of the budget measure.
“When the budget was being prepared, the President was definitely not aware of the details of these insertions by senators,” Castro said.
“But now, after seeing what happened to the funds allocated for flood control projects, this has prompted him to dig deeper into the nature of these allocations,” Castro said.
Malacañang also said the ongoing inquiry aims to trace how the contentious insertions were channelled and whether they were used appropriately.
The President earlier ordered a review of infrastructure spending after red flags were raised on several flood control contracts across regions.
Congress passed the P5.768-trillion 2025 GAA in July, with the Executive department giving assurance that every peso will be used for programs directly benefiting the people.
Lacson earlier said more than P100 billion worth of insertions in the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) budget for 2025 were from the Senate alone.
“Introducing insertions are not illegal. It is our mandate as lawmakers to review the National Expenditure Program and introduce amendments. The problem is that many lawmakers abused this mandate,” he said.
He also noted that documents from the House of Representatives showed pages of lawmakers listed in alphabetical order who made insertions for DPWH projects.
“It was like a roll call,” Lacson commented.
“I hope that in 2026, we will practice self-restraint. The people are angry so we must reform the way we pass the budget,” he added.
According to Lacson, the House made far larger amendments than the Senate’s in the 2025 budget.
He alleged that the surge of DPWH allocations reflected collusion between legislators and corrupt officials, including district engineers and former Undersecretary Roberto Bernardo, to carve out kickbacks.
Lacson warned that this practice violated the 1987 Constitution by prioritizing infrastructure over education in funds allocation.
While some of the allocations were tagged “For Later Release,” he said this created economic risks because worthwhile projects may be delayed or denied funding.
He urged the Senate to set an example of transparency in deliberating on the 2026 budget, especially during the period of individual amendments in plenary.
Senate President Vicente Sotto III, however, defended the practice of introducing amendments during budget deliberations as part of the regular process.
He added that it was unfortunate that controversies over ghost projects and failed flood control initiatives have cast the amendments in a negative light.
Meanwhile, Senator JV Ejercito, in a separate statement, said amendments can be positive if they support and strengthen programs identified in budget hearings.
He stressed that proposals should not be dismissed outright as long as they do not involve post-enactment intervention.
