Salceda not in favor of striking down unprogrammed funds from budget

Albay Representative and economist Joey Salceda said Tuesday he is not in favor of removing unprogrammed funds from the General Appropriations Act (GAA), saying doing so will not resolve the flood control controversy.

During the oral arguments on consolidated petitions challenging the budget, Salceda, as amicus curiae, said striking down unprogrammed appropriations "will neither breed nor bust the ghost of the flood control."

"In a world characterized as… volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous, we would have had to devise [unprogrammed appropriations]… as an indispensable instrument of the state in order to defend and ensure the welfare of our people," he said.

Salceda said that removing unprogrammed appropriations retroactively penalizes legitimate contractors, disrupts ongoing foreign-assisted projects, and leaves the government without a crisis instrument.

He also argued that the removal would shift the burden of budget governance to the judiciary.

"More than one reasonable interpretation exists. The history supports the view that the ceiling applies to programmed expenditures only, not to unprogrammed," he said.

Salceda also said a law governing the budget should be in place.

"The highest articulation of the priorities of a nation is the budget. And therefore, that should actually be the first thing that any government will do after it is constituted or after a constitution is ratified. That should be the priority," he said.

Meanwhile, during the last oral arguments, former National Economic and Development Authority chief Solita Collas-Monsod warned that the system of unprogrammed appropriations resembles a modern form of pork barrel that undermines development and accountability. — VDV, GMA News