Errata in 2015 nat’l budget only to correct typo errors, miscomputations –Abad

Only to correct typos and miscalculation of figures.

This was how Budget Secretary Florencio "Butch" Abad dismissed on Tuesday speculations by government critics that the errata his department would be issuing on the proposed 2015 national budget aim to further redefine the meaning of “savings” and to insert some items not included in the original proposal.

 

Interviewed at the sidelines of a Senate budget hearing, Abad said the errata only aim to initiate minor corrections in the 2015 national budget and would definitely not change the substance of the proposal.

 

"They (corrections) are not substantive in the sense that you are changing definitions. We already proposed that, and that is already in the 2015 NEP (National Expenditure Program), which was approved on second reading,” Abad said.

In a separate text to House reporters, Abad said: "All we are introducing are correction to errors. It's thick because of corrections in the budgets of certain SUCs (state universities and colleges)." 

 

On Friday last week, the House of Representatives approved the 2015 national budget on second reading.

 

Under Section 67 of the proposed 2015 national budget, savings is defined as portions of allocations that "have not been released or obligated" due to "discontinuance or abandonment of a program, activity or project for justifiable causes, at any time during the validity of the appropriations."

 

The redefinition of “savings” came following the Supreme Court decision declaring as unconstitutional certain acts under the administration’s Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP).

 

Abad said the errata only aim to correct typographical errors and some miscalculations of figures.

 

“The errata is really, principally for typographical errors. Because you know, in the course of preparing the budget, some spelling are wrong, or the figures are missing, so principally, most of them will be contained there (in the errata),” Abad said.

 

The Budget chief said another matter the errata would correct are the wrong performance indicators of some government agencies that in the proposed budget have been given additional funds and responsibilities.

 

“Because you gave them additional money, or you give them additional responsibilities, you have to adjust their performance indicators,” Abad said.

 

He cited as example the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) whose budget in the proposed GAA was increased to enable it to construct additional classrooms and farm-to-market roads.

 

Abad said there are also some reallocations that need to be done on the 2015 national budget, which they failed to include when crafting the proposal.

 

“The other one (contained in the errata) is the reallocation. For example, in the case of DSWD, the poverty (rate) recently went down by two percent, so they did a recomputation of the number of poor people. So now, we need to adjust the number of people that they will serve in the coming years,” he said.

 

He added that certain portions of the budget for DSWD’s poverty reduction program would be reallocated to other programs that need immediate funding.

 

“But definitely, wala na tayong idadagdag, ibabawas or ire-redefine sa 2015 national budget as alleged by our critics. I can assure you, 100 percent, na walang ganun,” Abad said, adding that the issuance of errata is not an unusual practice in introducing corrections on proposed national budget.

 

“Every year we have been doing that, even before I came in (the DBM). We do this regularly, especially before the period of amendments just to correct mistakes,” he said.

 

On Monday, Bayan Muna party-list Rep. Neri Colmenares sought the withdrawal of the House’s approval of the budget on second reading, expressing fears that the insertion of some corrections through the DBM’s errata might result in the creation of a bigger lump sum amount or pork barrel fund next year.