Senate President Franklin Drilon PRIB FILE PHOTO
MANILA—The leaders of the Senate and the House of Representatives are standing firm on their decision to turn off the flow of pork barrel from year to year during the budget season instead of passing a measure that would banish it once and for all.
Senate President Franklin Drilon said that “there is no need for a special law” to abolish the Priority Development Assistance Fund as an item in the General Appropriations Act or the national budget.
Drilon was reacting to a contention by Supreme Court Justice Antonio Carpio that the PDAf could be abolished only through an act of Congress or a ruling by the Supreme Court.
In a text message to the Inquirer, Drilon argued that the PDAF could be eliminated if the President decided not to include the pork barrel in the proposed budget or if Congress itself excised the pork barrel provision, which is what he said the Senate intends to do in the coming budget deliberations, albeit on yearly basis instead of Carpio’s permanent abolition.
Sen. Ralph Recto said “many in the Senate have said we will abolish PDAF.”
Drilon said that the President has two more options in lopping off the pork barrel from the budget, namely, by exercising his line-veto power or impounding the release, fully or partially, of any appropriation in the budget, including the PDAF.
Speaker Feliciano Belmonte for his part said that “pork does not exist outside of the GAA,” which is what he claimed the House of Representatives has done with the 2013 budget measure that it has passed on second reading.
“Any infrastructure line-itemed in the GAA and therefore determined before the GAA is approved and in accordance with the legislative process, this is not pork,” said Belmonte.
When asked why Congress did not want to make the abolition more long lasting and not just on a yearly basis, Belmonte said: “Post-GAA determination by the legislator is verboten. Let’s look forward. I think everyone will get to accept it as a fact of life.”
Sen. Juan Edgardo Angara said that it was up to the Supreme Court to settle the pork barrel issue by simply declaring it unconstitutional.
Recto said the best alternative to a complete abolition of the pork barrel was to enforce a purely line item budget “as far as practicable.”
“More transparent, quicker implementation, easier monitoring, and less discretion. Overall, a better budget,” he said.