Suansing: No pork barrel, no hidden funding in House-OK’d P6.7-trillion 2026 budget

There is no pork barrel—discretionary funds for lawmakers—in the proposed P6.7-trillion national budget approved by the House of Representatives, nor in the proposed P243 billion in unprogrammed funds, House appropriations panel chairperson Mikaela Suansing said Monday.

At a press conference on Monday, the Nueva Ecija lawmaker said that all budget items are clearly stated for a particular purpose, and that members of Congress will not be involved in the the implementation of aid programs.

“The House never engages in post-enactment intervention. Ibig sabihin po, kapag na-aprubahan na po ang budget, ang budget po para sa mga programa na ito ay napupunta sa mga kanya-kanyang mga ahensya. Iyong AICS, sa DSWD, sa kaso ng MAIFP, sa DOH, iyong TUPAD, sa DOLE. Nasa discretion po ng ahensya kung paano po i-didisburse [ang pondo sa mga ito],” Suansing said.

(This means when the budget is approved, the budget for these programs goes to the concerned agencies. AICS is with DSWD, MAIFP is with DOH, TUPAD with DOLE. The implementation of these programs depends on the discretion of these agencies.)

AICS is the Assistance to Individuals in Crisis Situations under the Department of Social Welfare and Development, while MAIFP is the Medical Assistance for Indigent and Financially Incapacitated Patients under the Health department.

TUPAD is the Tulong Panghanapbuhay sa Ating Disadvantaged/Displaced Workers under the Department of Labor and Employment.

“They have their own internal guidelines, they have their own internal procedures as to how to disburse these funds. At wala pong intervention ang Kongreso patungkol po sa implementasyon ng mga programa nito,” she added.

(There is no intervention on the part of the members of Congress in implementing these programs.) 

Likewise, Suansing revealed a number of specific budget items that will be funded by the unprogrammed funds, or those budget items that will only be funded if there are excess government revenue collection or secured loans. These include but are not limited to:

• P3.33 billion for payment of SSS Loan through National Government Subsidy
• P2 billion for Competitive Grant Mechanism for State Universities and Colleges under CHED
• P21 billion for National Health Insurance Program subsidy
• P7.87 billion for Department of Education (DepEd)-Office of the Secretary School-based Feeding Program, textbooks and other instructional materials, Basic Education Facilities, Public Schools Infrastructure Program (PSIP), Physical Fitness and School Sports and Basic Education Curriculum
• P450 million for rehabilitation of former United States Air Force Hospital in Clark Freeport, Pampanga, and
• conversion to National Museum of the Philippines Central Luzon under DepEd
• P13.5 million for Quality Teacher Education Program under DepEd
• P2.35 billion for scholarship program for eligible incumbent Child Development Workers (CDWs) including Universal Access to Quality Tertiary Education requirements under DOLE-TESDA
• P1.31 billion for requirements for hospital equipment and other facilities
• P6.6 billion for AICS under DSWD

“Another characteristic of pork barrel funds as it is known in the past would be its lump sum nature (allocation with a generic description). At kung nakita niyo naman po yun, nakadetalye po lahat ngayon, wala pong mga nakatagong pondo, wala pong mga nakatago o mga nakabaon na mga programa,” Suansing stressed.

(As you've seen, all budget items are stated in full details. There are no hidden funds and there are no hidden programs.)

“Atin pong maibibigay ang kasiguraduhan sa ating mga kababayan na wala pong pork barrel funds sa ating budget para sa taong 2026, at sa mga susunod po na taon sa ilalim po na ating iderato bilang chairperson ng Committee on Appropriations,” she added.

(So I can make the assurance that there are no pork barrel funds under the 2026 budget [approved by the House], and all those succeeding proposed budgets under my leadership as House appropriations chair.) 

Not pork-free, say progressives

Earlier, the Makabayan bloc lawmakers Antonio Tinio of ACT Teachers, Sarah Elago of Gabriela, and Renee Co of Kabataan said the livestreaming of the budget proceedings is mere performative transparency since the House still retained P243 billion worth of unprogrammed funds instead of removing them altogether.

"Pakitang-tao lang yan. The pork barrel insertions and bloated unprogrammed Appropriations remains intact and is not likely to be dismantled when it goes through the Senate and on to the bicam,” they said.

(That is all for show.)

"Livestreaming the bicam would be like broadcasting a wrestling match that everyone knows is rigged. The pork allocations of the president and the legislators will survive," they added.

Further, Co said the live streaming of the budget process, including the Bicameral Conference Committee proceedings which reconcile the different versions of the House and Senate version of the proposed budget, is just a desperate move to salvage the Marcos, Jr. 's administration's tattered credibility on anti-corruption efforts.

"Walang tunay na transparency dito—puro kasinungalingan at palabas lang," she added.

(There is no transparency here. All are just lies and theatrics.)

In response to Suansing’s contention that the House-approved proposed 2026 budget is pork-free, the Makabayan bloc maintained that pork barrel still exists because each district is still being provided infrastructure funds.

“The pork we are mentioning are the congressional allocations for infrastructure for congressional districts as well as allocation for partylist groups along with presidential pork in the UA (unprogrammed appropriations) and CIF (confidential and intelligence funds),” the opposition lawmakers told GMA News Online.

“This system of allocation is openly discussed in budget hearings. What Rep. Suansing is referring to is the old system of pork or PDAF which was already ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court because it allowed lump sum appropriations and post enactment intervention. This has long been replaced by a system of allocations per district, as shown by the budget for every district engineering office, with more or less the same amounts for itemized projects, as if the appropriations were being divided "equally" among lawmakers. The system of "allocations" is the reason why lawmakers are entitled to nominate projects and can "choose" contractors and receive kickbacks,” they added.

Suansing, on the other hand, said it cannot be readily assumed that district lawmakers are the ones proposing the projects for their respective districts because the Department of Public Works and Highways District Engineering Offices also have the authority to identify infrastructure projects at the district level.

“I am trying to understand what the term proponent really refers to. Because under the DPWH (Department of Public Works and Highways) budget, you can see in the House General Appropriations Bill (HGAB) [that we approved on final reading], these allocations are put forward by DPWH District Engineering Offices of different provinces,” she said.

“When you look at the HGAB, the proponent would be the District Engineering Office [of DPWH]. Which proponent are we looking for here? Because based on the HGAB, a project can be proposed by either the District Engineering Office, the DPWH Regional Office, or the DPWH Central Office. At that level, we can show how the DPWH are implementing these projects,” she added. — BM, GMA Integrated News