Guarantee letters vouch for those in need, not political intervention —Rep. Puno

The issuance of guarantee or referral letters by members of the House of Representatives and Senate to their constituents seeking government assistance is not a political intervention, Deputy Speaker and Antipolo Rep. Ronaldo Puno said Monday.

Puno said it is the job of lawmakers to advocate for their people’s welfare. 

He was responding to queries on the provision included in the bicameral conference committee report on the proposed P6.7 trillion national budget for 2026 "prohibiting political involvement in the distribution of cash and other types of financial aid" which covers all types of cash and non-cash financial assistance as announced by House appropriations committee chairperson and Nueva Ecija Rep. Mikaela Suansing.

“They say, no political figure, person, officer, or whatever, can be involved in any way in the distribution of these funds. How do you operationalize that? Right now, all of us are required to put in our requests to the DSWD, DOLE, or DOH. Wala naman kami pera diyan talaga. It is a request that we send to the departments because as is evidenced in the GAA (General Appropriations Act), the budget goes to the departments, not to individuals, not to the congressman,” Puno told reporters.

“Ang tulong lang naman kasi ng ating mga mambabatas is mag-refer at mag-rekomenda. 'Di ba? Hindi naman kami nagbabayad. Ang guarantee letter is not our guarantee. It is an assurance that you know, the beneficiary of this assistance is qualified. 'Yun lang. Masama ba 'yun? Sa tingin ko, hindi.  If you follow the provisions in the bicam, it's not clear [if that is prohibited]. But definitely, if you consider a guarantee letter as a public official using his position to get the fund eh baka magka-problema tayo doon,” Puno added.

(Our role really is to refer, recommend [them for assistance]. We don't pay for their needs.  It [guarantee letter] is an assurance that the beneficiary of this assistance is qualified. Is that wrong? I don't think so.)

“If it's (guarantee letter issuance) understood to be what it really is, which is merely a referral letter, in order that the Department of Health will help the patient involved, sa tingin ko, okay lang ‘yun,” the lawmaker pointed out.

“I'm not saying that the bicam version needs to be rejected. But I think that it has to be clarified,” he added.

Some lawmakers, health experts, and Church leaders criticized the use of guarantee letters saying it being utilized for patronage politics.

Meanwhile, Puno said that the files of the late Public Works and Highways undersecretary Maria Catalina Cabral does not prove a crime or any irregularity.

He said that part of the DPWH District Engineering Offices’ mandate is to consult with lawmakers on the merits on the proposed infrastructure projects in the districts, and to collate recommended projects from lawmakers in the event that the DPWH was not able to consider such a project, during the drafting of the agency’s proposed budget for the next fiscal year.

“The DE (District Engineer) goes to you and informs you of the projects in your district. Why? Because we are supposed to verify and oversee these projects, and not all barangays will be content with the projects that their respective areas get, and they raise these concerns to the members of Congress. What the DPWH did was to put a certain amount [out of their budget] for our recommended projects. For example, it could be P100 million. That is an allocable, but that does not mean that it is us lawmakers who will get to spend that money,” Puno said.

“That money is under DPWH, and they have the final say where it would be spent on. There's nothing irregular [on allocables]. I don't know why, you know, people are getting all excited when they hear these terms. They don't understand what the terms mean. You have to understand it before you can talk about it,” he added.—AOL, GMA Integrated News