Power of purse can ease graft, lawmaker insists
MANILA, Philippines — House appropriations committee chair and ACT-CIS Rep. Eric Go Yap only wants to remove the funds of corrupt government officials and not slash or scrap an entire agency’s budget.
Yap on Saturday clarified that he never said he would “zero” the budget of agencies found to be prone to corruption or led by individuals who have been found to be corrupt.
But the House of Representatives can use its power of the purse to redirect funds away from the hands of corrupt officials, he said in a phone interview with the Inquirer.
“At least we [did] something. It’s better than doing nothing,” Yap said, agreeing with Senate Minority Leader Franklin Drilon and House appropriations committee vice chair and Muntinlupa City Rep. Ruffy Biazon who disputed his proposal.
“[Drilon and Biazon] are right that it’s better to remove corrupt officials. But does Congress have the power to remove them? No. It’s the executive’s job. My point is, Congress has budget hearings and the bicameral conference. We can use that to at least threaten the corrupt officials,” he said.
Intel fund removal
As an example, Yap said the House could remove the intelligence fund of a deputy commissioner of the Bureau of Customs (BOC) if an informal probe points to his involvement in corruption.
“Let’s say a deputy commissioner is corrupt. Let’s remove his intelligence fund. Realign it to the BOC modernization program … The BOC will still benefit from it,” he said.
Yap said a small group of congressmen were conducting an informal investigation of complaints of corruption against government officials.
He also cited as an example Philippine Health Insurance Corp. (PhilHealth), which has been under intense scrutiny by the Senate, the House and the executive branch over allegations of corruption and irregularities.
“Another example, the PhilHealth. For example, we can transfer the funds to a line agency of the Department of Health (DOH) which will directly benefit the people, like the [Medical Assistance for Indigent Patients],” Yap said.
He went on: “I never said that the agency will be crippled [through budget cuts]. That’s wrong.”
“We want to do our part. We deliberate the budget. If we see an item that is prone to corruption, we can remove it, transfer it to another line item that we know won’t be affected by corruption and will actually benefit the people,” Yap said.
He added: “We won’t make it zero. We never said that we will scrap the budget. We may reduce it, transfer it within the same agency, where it’s less prone to corruption.”
“We won’t form committees because we’re on break. On our own, we have a small group. We’re looking at complaints that we received about this and that agency, so we investigate. We may call the agencies, but not formally. Then we will have a conclusion. But we won’t have a formal hearing because it might delay the budget,” he said.
Yap said he “might consider” presenting the findings of the House’s informal investigation at the bicameral conference, but noted that both chambers of Congress will have to agree on the findings.
He said the small group’s priority in investigating corruption allegations were the BOC and the Bureau of Internal Revenue, which are both under the Department of Finance, and the DOH.
