Lawmaker and groups question lack of gov’t subsidy for PhilHealth
A LAWMAKER, and more than 80 organizations, coalitions, and private individuals on Thursday sounded the alarm over the decision to cut the government subsidy for state-run Philippine Health Insurance Corp. (PhilHealth) under the 2025 budget bill, as ratified by both Houses of Congress.
Convening in a joint panel on Wednesday, senators and congressmen moved to deny PhilHealth any state subsidy for 2025 as it has accumulated about half-a-trillion worth of reserve funds, Senator Mary Grace Natividad S. Poe-Llamanzares explained during Wednesday’s plenary session after the conference committee meeting.
The proposed P6.352-trillion national budget will be signed by President Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr. “before Christmas Day,” the Presidential Communications Office said in a statement on Thursday.
Party-list Rep. Wilbert T. Lee said their decision to cut PhilHealth’s proposed subsidy is illegal and could affect the health benefits received by indigent Filipinos under the state health insurer.
“Clearly, this is contrary to the objectives of the Universal Healthcare Law,” he said in a statement in Filipino. “What will happen to our poor countrymen who rely on these subsidies?”
The National Government subsidizes the state health insurer to cover the premiums of its indigent members. All Filipinos are automatically covered by PhilHealth, under the Universal Healthcare Act.
The decision by lawmakers to rid PhilHealth of state subsidies came amid a controversy involving the remittance of P89.9 billion of its funds to state coffers, which prompted petitions before the Supreme Court seeking to stop the transfer.
The high court in October issued a temporary restraining order against further transfers of PhilHealth’s unused funds.
A total of P60 billion have already been transferred to the Treasury in three tranches since May, while the fourth and final tranche worth P29.9 billion was supposed to be remitted to the Treasury in November.
“PhilHealth has P600 billion in reserve funds and they should use these to address delayed reimbursements, and we will use this (funding subsidy) to fund departments that need it more,” Ms. Poe, who also heads the Senate Finance Committee, said.
Ms. Poe’s argument defending the cutting of government subsidies to PhilHealth is “deceptive,” the alliance of healthcare advocates, labor groups and individual stakeholders said in a separate statement on Thursday.
The joint statement was signed by more than 70 organizations and coalitions, including the Action for Economic Reforms, and Sentro ng mga Nagkakaisa at Progresibong Manggagawa, and 10 individuals, including healthcare advocate Anthony C. Leachon, former lawmaker Lorenzo R. Tañada III, and former Finance Undersecretary Cielo D. Magno,
They alleged the move to defund PhilHealth’s subsidies is against the 2012 Sin Tax Reform Law and the 2019 Universal Healthcare Act.
“The zero budget assaults the Sin Tax Law that earmarks funds from tobacco and sweetened beverage taxes for PhilHealth. Moreover, the zero budget strips the premiums of tens of millions of PhilHealth’s indirect contributors — the poor, the senior citizens, and persons with disabilities — and thus makes the direct contributors, many of whom are from the working class, bear the sole burden of funding PhilHealth,” they said.
“It is the government’s mandate to uphold the people’s constitutional right to health by providing the appropriations that will cover the premiums of indirect contributors or those who cannot afford to pay,” they added.
The approval of the bicameral bill would prompt the filing of petitions against the Congress’ decision to deny PhilHealth subsidies before the Supreme Court, according to the coalition. — Kenneth Christiane L. Basilio
