Abad on 2015 budget: It’s rational, not admin’s election fund
Budget Secretary Florencio “Butch” Abad INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
MANILA, Philippines—Budget Secretary Florencio Abad has dismissed claims that the P2.606-trillion 2015 national budget was the administration’s preparatory budget for the 2016 elections.
Abad insisted that the proposed General Appropriations Act of 2016 was a “rational budget’’ designed to reduce poverty, expand the economy and promote good governance.
This, he said, has been the principle behind the National Expenditures Program that the Aquino administration has been submitting to Congress since 2011.
“We have our budget priority framework, and we have sectoral and geographic focus. How can that be?’’ he said in an interview after Thursday’s hearing on the P62-billion payables to National Power Corp. employees.
Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago said the 2015 budget had been designed to allot more money to President Aquino’s allies and departments that are “viewed as crucial to the end results of the elections.’’
For instance, in the P104.5-billion budget of the Department of Interior and Local Government, there was an item for a water service, a function that belongs to the National Irrigation Administration, she said.
Liberal Party secretary general Senen Sarmiento said the funding for water services was not related to irrigation.
The Salintubig project was designed to improve health sanitation and provide water to rural communities in accordance with the Millennium Development Goals, he said.
Santiago, in a privilege speech, claimed that the 2015 budget was loaded with P37.3 billion in pork barrel, and had a loophole that would allow the declaration of savings at any time of the year.
Senators and congressional representatives met last week to reconcile their versions of the budget measure, including redefining savings to address concerns like Santiago’s.
In their bicameral conference committee, the lawmakers agreed on a definition of savings that would allow a government agency to declare and use them only after satisfying certain conditions, and if the savings did not result from the agency’s fault or negligence.
Both the Senate and House panels said this complied with the Supreme Court ruling that the Disbursement Acceleration Program was unconstitutional.
“The staff are still ironing out the conflicting amounts and provisions,’’ Sen. Francis Escudero, chair of the Senate panel and finance committee, said when sought for an update Saturday.
The panels are set to meet on Monday again to approve their reconciled version.
