By passing the P6.793-trillion national budget for 2026, the House of Representatives once again disproved Benjamin Franklin’s timeless insight on learning: “Tell me and I forget, teach me and I may remember, involve me and I learn.”
For despite being told, taught, and fully involved in the unraveling of the flood control scandal that shocked the nation, the lower house still learned nothing. Even as revelations of anomalous flood control projects and grotesque kickbacks obliterated Filipinos’ sense of proportion, lawmakers pushed through with a budget that perpetuates the very scheme that enabled this plunder.
Various House committees may have held hearings to “establish the truth,” but the truth hurt too much to act upon. The 2026 budget was mangled once more to favor vested interests. Funds meant for health and education were shortchanged; allocations for vital social infrastructure were diverted to private gain. Mansions, luxury cars, and designer goods became the unintended beneficiaries of public money.
But they never learn.
UNPROGRAMMED APPROPRIATIONS: THE BLACK BOX OF THE BUDGET
The House’s greatest sin is institutionalizing the abuse of unprogrammed appropriations (UA) — the murky reserve funds that have turned into a parallel budget.
In principle, UA are standby funds released only if there are excess revenues, new loan proceeds, or foreign grants secured after the budget is enacted. They provide flexibility for unforeseen priorities without the need for supplemental appropriations, an understandable fiscal instrument — in theory.
But in practice, UA has become the black box of the national budget. Projects funded under UA are often not specified in the General Appropriations Act (GAA), making them nearly impossible for civil society or oversight bodies to track. This opacity has opened the door to ghost projects, substandard works, and politically driven spending.
Most dangerous of all, it politicizes public expenditure. Politicians can insert projects benefiting their own districts or patrons without the same scrutiny that applies to programmed funds. Strategic planning and performance-based budgeting are cast aside for expediency and personal gain.
THE FLOOD CONTROL TEMPLATE OF CORRUPTION
The flood control scandal offers a masterclass in how UA can be twisted into a personal ATM.
Both chambers of Congress have confirmed, and multiple media investigations have shown, that around P600 million worth of flood control projects in Bulacan were financed through UA. Many of these projects were ghost projects — nonexistent, duplicative, or lacking detailed designs and permits.
Between 2023 and 2024, about 3,770 public-works projects worth P214 billion were reportedly approved under UA, including hundreds linked to flood control. Some were inserted at the last minute and awarded to preselected contractors, bypassing competitive public bidding.
This is not an accident; it is a pattern. Only 125 contractors cornered P100 billion or nearly 20% of the entire flood control budget since 2022. Concentration of contracts in a few hands mirrors the old “pork barrel” logic: favor loyalists, punish critics, and share the spoils among friends.
By keeping UA as a convenient pool of discretionary funds, Congress has chosen to institutionalize patronage and deinstitutionalize accountability.
4 WAYS THE 2026 BUDGET ENSURES MORE OF THE SAME
First, insertion by exclusion will persist. Flood control projects omitted from the Department of Public Works and Highways’ (DPWH) official program can simply reappear under UA. The public sees a “lean” infrastructure plan, but the hidden budget remains intact — only waiting for release once “additional revenues” are declared.
Second, contractor concentration will continue. The Duterte-era pattern of a few politically connected contractors winning hundreds of projects remains entrenched. The Marcos administration’s own disclosures confirm it.
Third, ghost projects will thrive. With minimal oversight and recycled templates, DPWH districts can replicate project papers across localities — same cost, same design, different location. The purpose is not to build but to liquidate.
And fourth, discretionary awarding will expand. Local officials and legislators will keep claiming ownership of projects with giant billboards announcing “Funded through the initiative of Congressman So-and-So.” It is political branding, not public service.
A BUDGET PASSED IN HASTE, AGAINST PROTEST
Despite serious objections, the 2026 budget raced through the House. Rappler reported that progressive blocs like Akbayan and Makabayan protested the inclusion of P243 billion in unprogrammed appropriations, warning that Congress was effectively skirting constitutional limits by transferring programmed funds to UA while inserting pet projects into the main expenditure program.
As Akbayan Rep. Chel Diokno noted: “We are simply allowing the Executive to control P243 billion without knowing how or where it will be used.”
The Mamamayang Liberal Party’s Rep. Leila de Lima added that this practice amounts to “undue delegation of legislative power,” echoing a long-pending Supreme Court challenge against UA.
ACT Teachers Rep. Antonio Tinio went further, describing UA as “the new presidential pork barrel.” He noted that similar discretionary pockets of power exist elsewhere in the budget such as the Assistance to Individuals in Crisis Situations (AICS), Tulong Panghanapbuhay sa Ating Disadvantaged/Displaced Workers (TUPAD), and Medical Assistance to Indigent and Financially Incapacitated Patients (MAIFIP) programs where political endorsements suffice for fund release. These, too, perpetuate patronage rather than equitable social protection.
MISPLACED PRIORITIES, MISUSED RESOURCES
Those who opposed the 2026 budget had every reason to vote “no.” The numbers speak for themselves.
While the government boasts of a P1.28-trillion education budget — the “highest ever” — it still falls short. As one lawmaker pointed out, this translates to only P90.50 per student per day. The plan to build 25,000 new classrooms barely dents the 165,000-classroom backlog.
For comparison, the TUPAD program, long criticized for inefficiency and leakages, received P22 billion or more than 13 times the allocation for industry and MSME development (P1.62 billion). This betrays a distorted sense of national priorities: patronage over productivity.
Public health fares no better. Health spending remains only 1% of GDP, far below the World Health Organization’s 5% benchmark. PhilHealth’s P113-billion subsidy is insufficient for an institution “in critical condition,” as one analyst put it. “If PhilHealth were a patient, it would already be in need of life support, yet the 2026 budget offers only a band-aid.”
TOKEN TRANSPARENCY, CONCENTRATED POWER
The House leadership has tried to project reform by livestreaming budget hearings and scrapping small committees in favor of a so-called Budget Amendment Review Sub-Committee (BARSc). But this only created a new bottleneck.
Civil society groups complain that their participation was “nominal,” and that they were denied access to BARSc reports before the second reading. As Representative Paolo Marcoleta observed, the new setup concentrates amendment power in the hands of a few, marginalizing other members of the appropriations committee.
In the end, only 12 representatives voted against the 2026 budget, with two abstaining. Meanwhile, 287 lawmakers voted yes, and 127 either decided not to vote or failed to vote. The numbers tell a story of institutional inertia — of a legislature that refuses to learn from its own scandals.
THE COST OF NEVER LEARNING
Every peso misallocated under UA is a peso denied to a student, a patient, or a small entrepreneur. As we stressed time and again, every ghost project funded is a public school unbuilt, a bridge unmaintained, a flood unmitigated.
If Congress refuses to correct the misuse of unprogrammed appropriations, it will remain the House that never learns — not from the pork barrel scandal, not from the pandemic, and not even from the flood that exposed its own corruption.
As the nation braces for another year of tight budgets and lofty promises, one truth stands out: learning requires involvement, but involvement without accountability is just complicity.
Diwa C. Guinigundo is the former deputy governor for the Monetary and Economics Sector, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP). He served the BSP for 41 years. In 2001-2003, he was alternate executive director at the International Monetary Fund in Washington, DC. He is the senior pastor of the Fullness of Christ International Ministries in Mandaluyong.
