Veto of alleged ‘pork’ funds could strengthen credibility of Marcos

By Chloe Mari A. Hufana, Reporter

THE veto of alleged “pork” allocations in the 2026 national budget would allow President Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr. to strengthen the credibility of his administration’s commitment to fighting corruption, analysts said over the weekend, as civil society groups step up calls for the Palace to strike out contentious provisions in the bicameral committee’s report.

“The veto of the alleged pork allocations or whatever related items in the 2026 budget is in effect an opportunity to strengthen the credibility of this administration in its seriousness to pursue its anti-corruption campaign,” Gary G. Ador Dionisio, dean of De La Salle-College of St. Benilde’s School of Diplomacy and Governance, said via Facebook Messenger.

The veto power exists precisely to prevent questionable practices in the General Appropriations Act and should be viewed as a constitutional accountability measure rather than a manifestation of political hostility or grandstanding, he said.

Allegations of pork barrel insertions, if left unaddressed, risk undermining public trust in the budget process, he noted.

Mr. Marcos is set to ink the 2026 national budget today (Jan. 5), Executive Secretary Ralph G. Recto earlier said. This is the first time in his administration that the country started the year with a reenacted budget.

The Marcos administration missed its year-end target as Congress ratified the 2026 spending plan worth P6.793 trillion only last Dec. 29.

Under the Constitution, the President may veto specific items in the national budget to block unconstitutional, excessive, or questionable appropriations, serving as a check on Congress’ spending power to uphold fiscal discipline, transparency and accountability.

The veto push has intensified following a call by budget watchdog Social Watch Philippines for the President to scrap at least P319 billion in what it described as highly questionable allocations in the post-bicameral version of the 2026 spending bill.

The group said last Saturday that last-minute insertions and lump-sum appropriations resemble the old pork barrel system, which it described as opaque and prone to political favoritism.

“The 2026 budget is not people-centered, despite what the bicam committee claims,” Ma. Victoria R. Raquiza, co-convenor of Social Watch Philippines, said in a statement.

“Despite the bicam livestreaming, numerous non-transparent side meetings and huddles took place, and major last-minute adjustments were undertaken outside of the public’s scrutiny, thereby undermining the vaunted transparency and accountability of the bicam process,” she added.

Political science professor at the University of Makati Ederson DT. Tapia warned that a presidential veto should not be reduced to a gesture or a performance of resolve.

“It is not a performance of resolve, but an exercise of judgment,” he said via Facebook Messenger, adding that vetoing items merely for visibility risks confusing symbolism with substance.

If budget items are to be struck down, they should fail clear tests of transparency, accountability and consistency with national development priorities, Mr. Tapia said.

‘FLEETING’ EFFECT
The veto, however, should be only the opening move. It must be accompanied by concrete institutional measures to carry lasting meaning.

These include full public disclosure of what was vetoed and why, tighter and clearer rules on discretionary allocations to close gray areas that allow questionable insertions to reemerge, and stronger oversight by institutions such as the Commission on Audit, with real consequences where abuses are established.

Where credible red flags exist, investigations should be allowed to proceed independently and without political hesitation, he said.

Absent such measures, a veto risks being “fleeting — visible today, forgotten tomorrow,” Mr. Tapia added.

When anchored on clear principles and sustained by enforcement, however, it can help restore public trust in the budget process and reassert that public money is governed by institutions rather than discretion.

He also urged a more measured reading of the 2026 budget debate, noting that much of the opposition appears shaped by recent governance disappointments.

While such skepticism is understandable, it should not harden into the assumption that no national budget can ever be implemented properly, he said.

The Philippines is probing a massive graft scandal, specifically on public works projects. The revelations of investigations led to the economy slowing down and the local currency reaching historical low values due to weak government spending and local confidence.

GOV’T WORKERS’ PAY
Meanwhile, a labor group said the proposed 2026 national budget could put government workers’ salaries, pensions, and benefits at risk, calling the reported funding arrangement a threat to pay certainty for public servants.

The Sentro ng mga Nagkakaisa at Progresibong Manggagawa (SENTRO) flagged reports that P43.24 billion intended for government personnel services has been moved to unprogrammed appropriations, funds released only if excess revenues become available.

“You do not place workers’ salaries on standby. You do not gamble with livelihoods,” according to SENTRO Chairperson Abdulani Lakibul. He noted that once salaries are treated as contingent, delays and nonpayment often follow, citing similar issues with Health Emergency Allowances during the COVID-19 pandemic.

SENTRO also questioned how the budget item, reportedly labeled “For Payment of Personnel Services Requirements,” appeared only at the bicameral conference committee stage, after being absent from both the House and Senate versions. “When billions for salaries suddenly surface at the bicam level, workers have every reason to fear,” Mr. Lakibul said.

SENTRO urged the Department of Budget and Management to clarify the report and called on the President to veto any provision that would turn salaries into contingent payments.

The group also pushed for a supplemental budget to restore all personnel funding to fully programmed appropriations, warning that a “government that cannot guarantee pay is failing its most basic duty.”

Public Services Labor Independent Confederation (PSLINK), a national umbrella group of government unions, likewise alleged that the bicameral 2026 budget gambles away public workers’ pay, benefits, and pensions to protect pork barrel and politically driven “ayuda” (aid) funds.

In a separate statement, PSLINK said that the bicameral panel retained P243 billion in unprogrammed appropriations, a lump-sum fund released only at the discretion of the executive, making them vulnerable to political manipulation. “This means the bicam deliberately chose to gamble P43 billion worth of public workers’ pay, benefits, and pensions on the uncertain availability of so-called ‘excess revenues.’ Instead of guaranteed funding, public workers are told to wait and hope — while pork and politically-driven ‘ayuda’ remain protected and assured,” the PSLINK said.

The group also alleged that the Miscellaneous Personnel Benefits Fund and the Pension and Gratuity Fund were cut by billions, while discretionary allocations for politically pliable programs, including medical assistance and social welfare “ayuda,” were preserved. PSLINK warned that such moves replicate the inequities suffered by health workers during the pandemic, whose Health Emergency Allowances were delayed or incomplete due to contingent funding.

“Making public workers’ compensation contingent while securing funds prone to political manipulation is a grave injustice, a violation of workers’ rights, and a betrayal of the teachers, health workers, social workers, uniformed personnel, and civil servants who keep public services running every day,” the group said.

The labor federation also called on the President to veto pork barrel and politically discretionary allocations and urged the government to restore at least P43 billion to ensure guaranteed salaries, benefits, and pensions. “Public workers’ compensation is a legal obligation, not a fiscal gamble — and any budget that treats it otherwise is unjust and indefensible,” PSLINK added. — with Erika Mae P. Sinaking