2027 budget: House execs say issues can be settled at bicam

MANILA, Philippines — Two leaders of the House of Representatives have appeared lukewarm toward a push to recall the 2027 budget bill recently passed by the chamber, saying any issues can be addressed at the bicameral conference committee.

At a press briefing on Monday, Deputy Speaker Ronaldo Puno and Bataan Rep. Albert Garcia said they believe the Supreme Court (SC) ruling declaring provisions in the 2024, 2025 and 2026 budgets unconstitutional will not affect the proposed P7.2-trillion 2027 budget, or the General Appropriations Bill (GAB) under House Bill No. 10858.

According to Garcia, senior vice chairperson of the House committee on appropriations, which crafts the annual budget, recalling the GAB might further stall the country’s economy.

Article continues after this advertisement

“First of all, the Office of the Solicitor General is seeking more clarity on the Supreme Court decision regarding the national budget so that even the House can act accordingly when the clarity is given. Second, we have to understand that our GDP is really at its lowest level as of now,” Garcia said.

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“And a delay in the passage of the budget might result in lowering our GDP, which will, of course, not produce much-needed jobs for our people. If we need to rectify — depending on the clarity given by the Supreme Court — if we can do it through the bicam if the issues that need adjustment are minor, in my personal opinion, we should do that there.”

Last Oct. 20, the SC struck down key provisions of the 2024, 2025, and 2026 national budgets for violating constitutional limits on government spending. It ruled that Congress cannot increase the president’s total recommended appropriations.

The SC also noted that while unprogrammed funds are not unconstitutional, they must be subject to strict safeguards.

READ: SC: Congress can’t bloat president’s budget

Article continues after this advertisement

Due to the SC decision, ACT Teachers party-list Rep. Antonio Tinio asked the House to recall the proposed 2027 budget so it could fix provisions crafted in a manner similar to those in previous budgets.

Tinio, a deputy minority leader, warned that next year’s budget risked being constitutionally flawed because it adopted the same standby funding provision as the 2026 budget.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: House urged to recall 2027 proposed budget to fix flaws

But Garcia said the decision would be up to the House leadership. Puno, however, doubted that the House would heed the request.

“Personally, I’m not worried about the Supreme Court decision because I don’t see any earth-shaking things there; it’s not going to reverse anything. Most of the things that they said there only require compliance, right? That there should be no unprogrammed, which is true because these cannot be released unless there’s savings; that’s what we have been saying,” Puno said.

“I think it’s something that whatever they brought up can be addressed, first in the Senate and then of course in the bicam later on. So will we return it? I doubt,” he added.

Why ‘insertions’ happen

Puno and Garcia, both members of the National Unity Party, clarified that the supposed insertions in budget bills occur because programs crafted at the grassroots level were not reflected in the National Expenditures Program (NEP).

The NEP is the budget crafted by the executive branch and eventually submitted to Congress for deliberation.

According to Garcia, House lawmakers feel strongly about projects that were not included in the NEP, which is why they fight for their inclusion in the budget, especially since funds for some infrastructure projects sometimes reach the House as lump sums.

“During the budget call… there is active participation in the bottom-up budgeting. So, the barangay captains, mayors, governors, agencies, and private sector are consulted, as well as the level of the Provincial Development Council and the Regional Development Council. But when the NEP comes out, it is gone,” he explained.

“Now, for example, the projects are not reflected, of course, when the NEP arrives at the House, you cannot fault the congressman for fighting for their districts. That is their mandate under the Constitution,” he added.

Puno said lawmakers were in a bind because it appeared they were making insertions, but they had to specify the projects because, as Garcia said, the funds in the NEP were lump sums.

“The problem is when the House got the NEP, the public works sections were lump sums. So the appropriations committee and Congress really had to produce the listing, right? The details are being done here because it did not come with details. It did not come here with a listing of projects,” Puno explained.

“So if you will look at it from afar, it seems that there is an insertion system that happened. When you look closer, the Congress had no choice; it had to fill up the blanks because it arrived on a lump sum, right?” he added.

This is not the first time Puno has insisted that the House had no role in budget issues. In August 2025, Puno said some items in the 2026 NEP contained allocations for projects that had already been completed.

READ: Puno: 2026 NEP contains projects already finished; probe needed

Puno said that after receiving the NEP, he learned during a hearing that Marikina 1st District Rep. Marcelino Teodoro would return the budget to the Department of Budget and Management because it included funding for completed projects.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

Puno said this prompted him to check the allocations for his district, Antipolo’s first district, and he found that projects proposed by the district and regional engineering offices of the Department of Public Works and Highways were no longer in the NEP. /mcm