Romualdez denies Tiangco's claim on aid program 'interventions'
This, after Tiangco claimed that the Speaker's "intervention" starts with the formation of a small committee that gathers suggested amendments after the House approves the proposed national budget on second reading.
'Why do you want it submitted before a small committee [after second approval]? Hawak ng Office of the Speaker iyong AICS (Assistance to Individuals in Crisis Situations). Puede nila i-review... We each give our suggested amendments to the small committee for AICS, TUPAD. That is not allowed because under a Supreme Court decision, once the budget is passed, Congress cannot intervene,' Tiangco said.
Tiangco also said that House members who join the Bagong Pilipinas Serbisyo Fair (BPSF), wherein government services are brought to the provinces, receive government aid allocations worth P7 million for AICS, P7 million for medical assistance for indigent patients, and P7 million for TUPAD or aid for those who lost jobs.
'Sinong congressman ang makikipagtalo sa akin na hindi totoo 'yan, pakitaan kami ng cellphone. May message 'yan. Totoo iyon eh. Alam ko kasi nabigyan ako nung pumunta ako," Tiangco said.
(I dare a House member to contest my claim. Let's show our mobile phones. There's a text message for that. I am telling the truth, and I know about it because I got one myself.)
Asked why he was flagging it just now given that he was allied with Romualdez during the 19th Congress, Tiangco said, 'When you are in the majority [bloc], you have to toe the line.'
'Baseless'
In a separate interview, House spokesperson Princess Abante dismissed Tiangco's claims as baseless.
'Alam niya po na hindi po totoo na ang Speaker ang may hawak sa mga pondo ng mga iba't ibang departamento. The departments are custodians of their allocation, and they decide how to disburse it,' Abante told reporters.
(Congressman Tiangco knows that the Speaker is not the keeper of the government agencies' funds. )
Likewise, Abante said the small committee is a legal mechanism where the House members can submit their proposed amendments to the budget for consideration, not a guarantee of inclusion.
'The small committee is a mechanism for efficient consolidation of the individual amendments of House members, which is well within the powers of the House of Representatives in the budget process,' Abante said.
Still, Abante said Tiangco is free to make a motion to abolish the small committee if he sees fit.
A motion needs a majority vote to be carried and adopted by the House.
'If he sees a small committee as an inappropriate measure, then he can make the appropriate motion in the plenary,' Abante said.
In closing, Abante questioned why Tiangco suddenly found the small committee irregular just now when it has been a longstanding practice of Congress.
'He has been a House member for many terms already, and he is only saying these things now. He can only speak as to why that is,' Abante added. —VAL, GMA Integrated News
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
GMA Network
2 days ago
- GMA Network
House to ‘yield' probe on a flood control project if name of solon comes up
A drone view shows a village in Calumpit, Bulacan inundated by high tide and flooding brought by heavy rains from the Habagat enhanced by Tropical Depression Emong. REUTERS/Eloisa Lopez The House of Representatives will "yield" its probe on an allegedly anomalous project if, during the course of its investigation, a member of the lower chamber is found to be involved, according to Bicol Saro party-list Rep. Terry Ridon. At a news forum on Saturday in Quezon City, Ridon said that if a member of the House is named during the probe, they 'will immediately recuse [the investigation] and yield it to, whether to an independent third party probe, if it will be formed, or to an executive led probe to make sure that there will be no conflict of interest or cover-up in the course of the tri-committee [hearings].' The House panel on Public Accounts chairman, however, clarified that the tri-com will not suspend its entire probe but will only 'recuse on a particular inquiry on a particular project if a name of a legislator came up.' 'For example, in project A, in the course of it there will be a whistleblower who will say, 'Congressman A took kickbacks from that project.' Obviously we will ask him [congressman] to explain and as soon as he gets to explain we will recuse and then endorse to the third party probe if it gets to be created or to the executive led probe,' explained Ridon. Ridon, who chairs the House Committee on Public Accounts which was tasked to investigate the anomalies on flood control projects, said his panel along with the committees on Public Works and Good Government are now awaiting the plenary's green light to begin the inquiry. 'This is not a personality led investigation, it is a project led investigation… We are going to do it on a project by project basis,' the lawmaker said at a news forum on Saturday in Quezon City. 'It's not a witch hunt, we have to be able to afford due process to anyone… Again, it should be on a project to project inquiry,' he said. With this, The lawmaker also said Baguio City Mayor Benjamin Magalong is welcome to submit his information on anomalous projects once the tri-com hearings commence. Magalong earlier said he was waiting to be called to Congress after he said there were lawmakers receiving payoffs from infrastructure projects, including flood control programs. The mayor's statement came after Ridon challenged him to show proof, which will back up his claims that some congressmen are supposedly receiving 30% to 40% kickbacks in government projects. President Ferdinand ''Bongbong'' Marcos Jr. earlier disclosed that 20% of the total P545 billion budget of flood control projects was awarded to only 15 contractors. 'This is another disturbing assessment, statistic: 20% of the entire P545 billion budget napunta lang sa 15 na contractor. Sa 15 na contractor na 'yan, lima sa kanila ay may kontrata sa buong Pilipinas. Keep going. Ayan. Ito na 'yung listahan,'' Marcos said on Monday as he launched the website on flood control projects. Asked if these contractors have links to sitting government executives and officials, Marcos said the administration is still looking into it. In his last State of the Nation Address, the President vowed to ensure that those involved in anomalous flood control projects would be held accountable. —VAL, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
3 days ago
- GMA Network
Garin says there's clamor among House members for AKAP
"Kapag walang bahay ay hindi talaga puwedeng mapondohan ng Kongreso. Dahil walang bahay ang AKAP, mahirap siyang mapondohan. Pero andoon pa rin yung hinaing ng mga kongresista na baka sa 2027, maibalik ito or ma-expand ngayon yung coverage ng AICS," Garin said in an interview. Without an allocation in the National Expenditure Program for 2026, there might be no way to fund the Ayuda Para sa Kapos ang Kita Program (AKAP), or the government's assistance program for minimum-wage earners, Deputy Speaker Iloilo Rep. Janette Garin said on Friday. Garin, however, said there was a clamor among members of the House of Representatives for its revival in the 2027 national budget or to expand the coverage of the Assistance to Individuals in Crisis Situations (AICS) in 2026. "Kapag walang bahay ay hindi talaga puwedeng mapondohan ng Kongreso. Dahil walang bahay ang AKAP, mahirap siyang mapondohan. Pero andoon pa rin yung hinaing ng mga kongresista na baka sa 2027, maibalik ito or ma-expand ngayon yung coverage ng AICS," Garin said in an interview. "Talagang nakakapanghinayang yung isang programa na na-demonize," she added, referring to how criticisms that AKAP had been used for political patronage. (If there's no allocation for AKAP, Congress can't fund it. Without an allocation, it will be difficult to set aside funds for it. However, there is a call among House members to include it in 2027, or expand the coverage of AICS.) Garin said the House of Representatives respected the decision of the Department of Budget and Management not to allot funds to AKAP for 2026. "Nirerespeto natin ang DBM dito. Andoon lang yung paghinaing ng ibang kongresista na sayang kasi yung niche of population, yung near-poor na dapat tinutulungan natin," Garin said. (We respect the DBM. There's just the sentiment of congressmen that we'd miss serving a niche of the population, the near-poor, that we should help.) Poverty alleviation Akbayan Party-list Rep Perci Cendaña supported the decision of the Department of Budget and Management not to include funding for AKAP in the 2026 proposed budget. "Maraming mahihirap na kababayan natin ang nangangailangan ng salbabida lalo na't nalulunod sila sa napakataas ng presyo ng bilihin at hindi pa natin naipapapasa ang P200 wage hike," Cendaña told GMA Integrated News. "Sa ganang akin, mas kailangan pondohan ang mga poverty alleviation programs tulad ng 4Ps na mas programmatic at holistic, may konkretong targets, at may malinaw na patutunguhan–ang pagraduate mula sa kahirapan," he added. House Committee on Public Accounts Chair Rep Terry Ridon sees the value of AKAP. "Ito po ang AKAP ay para po doon sa mga talaga hong mababa ang sahod na mga kababayan po natin. Sinusuportahan po natin, sa totoo lang, yun pong AKAP nitong nagdangpanon and I'm not quite certain on what congress will do whether they will restore acup for next year," Ridon said. "Pero very important po yung prinsipyo na kailangan ho natin tulungan, hindi lang po yung mga pinakamahirap po nating mga kababayan, kundi kasama pa rin po dapat dito yun pong mga near-poor natin mga kababayan," he added. He said he will leave it to the chairperson of the House Committee on Appropriations to decide whether to provide funding for AKAP next year or not. Ridon said that when the Department of Social Welfare and Development defends its budget, it reports to the House of Representatives if the objectives of AKAP were met in the past two years.
GMA Network
3 days ago
- GMA Network
Makati Business Club, MAP join call for SC to reverse ruling on Sara's impeachment
The country's most influential business organizations, Makati Business Club (MBC) and Management Association of the Philippines (MAP), have joined legal and judicial advocates in calling on the Supreme Court to rule in favor of the House of Representatives' appeal to reverse its decision declaring the Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte as unconstitutional. 'We join a nation hopeful that the Supreme Court shall steadfastly resume its role in defending the Constitution that the Filipino people have ratified at a pivotal time in our history,' the MBC, MAP, Integrity Initiative, and Justice Reform Initiative said in a joint statement on Friday. 'We beg the Court to guard against the erosion of the constitutional design that can set aside the people's sovereign will. Our fidelity must always be to the principle that no one stands above the Constitution, and no government official is supreme over the Filipino people they are sworn to faithfully serve,' the groups said. The House has filed a motion for reconsideration asking the high court to reverse its ruling junking the impeachment case against the Vice President, saying it should be allowed to perform its exclusive duty to prosecute an impeachable official, and the Senate's to try the case. In its appeal before the high tribunal, the House argued that the fourth impeachment complaint, signed off by 215 House members, is the only initiated impeachment case against the Vice President because it met the Constitutional requirement of the complaint being endorsed by at least one-third of the House members, which allowed the House to transmit the Articles of Impeachment straight to the Senate en route to the impeachment trial, bypassing Committee deliberations. Voting 13-0, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously, deeming that the Articles of Impeachment are barred by the one-year rule under Article XI Section 3 paragraph 5 of the Constitution. Moreover, the magistrates ruled that the articles violate the right to due process. The MBC, MAP, Integrity Initiative, and Justice Reform Initiative said the 'decision of the [Supreme] Court as it stands sends a dangerous signal throughout the bureaucracy that abuse of power and corruption carry no consequence.' 'If we fail to hold the highest officials of the land accountable, how can we expect accountability from those below them?' The groups argued that the appeal filed by the lower chamber 'merits reconsideration,' due to the following: 'Deemed Initiated' is not in the Constitution One-year bar not triggered Venue for due process is specific Impeachment is to protect the people The groups explained that the high court treated the first three complaints as 'deemed dismissed' triggering the one-year bar for the initiation of the next impeachment, but, in effect, 'treated the first three complaints (counted as one) as 'deemed initiated' as well.' 'For how can there be a succeeding impeachment initiation to bar if the first has not even been initiated? This deeming effect rests on no Constitutional text because whenever the charter desires that legal effect, it states so expressly, such as on: who are 'deemed natural-born citizens' (Article IV, Section 2) ; who are 'deemed to have renounced citizenship' (Article IV, Section 4); 'deemed re-enacted' budget (Article VI, Section 25[7]); 'deemed certified' special election bill (Article VII, Section 10); 'deemed submitted for decision' (Article VIII, Section 15[2]; Article IX, Section 7); 'deemed lifted' freeze order (Article XVIII, Section 26[3]),' the groups said. 'If the framers of the Constitution intended that inaction by the House shall make an impeachment 'deemed initiated,' it would have been so indicated like the rest of the provisions above stated,' they added. With this, the groups said the Supreme Court, in its decision has said that 'complaints not properly endorsed by a member of the House within a reasonable period, even if dismissed, does not trigger the one-year bar.' They said that, 'in the same breath, the Court deems inaction by the House as a dismissal that triggers the one-year bar.' 'This, we submit, stands in tension with the Court's own reasoning: in both cases, the House did not act and yet there are different legal effects.' The MBC, MAP, Integrity Initiative, and Justice Reform Initiative said, moreover, said that the 'venue for due process is specific' as 'impeachment is neither a criminal nor administrative proceeding,' adding that 'it is a sui generis process for which the Constitution provides specific venues for due process: in the Committee on Justice for the first mode of impeachment (by verified complaint endorsed by a member of the House); or at the Senate Trial for the second mode (Impeachment by direct resolution transmitted to the Senate).' 'The Senate by stopping the impeachment initiated through the second mode, and the Court by its decision in this case as it stands, unfortunately prevented due process from happening,' the groups said. The groups further said that 'impeachment is to protect the people,' citing the Article XI, 'Accountability of Public Officers', of the Constitution which provides that the impeachment process exists to serve the public and 'not to shield a government official from the rigors of defending himself or herself, but to safeguard the people's right to demand accountability from those who wield authority supposedly on their behalf.' The groups stressed that 'without accountability, the government loses trust.' The MBC, MAP, Integrity Initiative, and Justice Reform Initiative said that if the high court's ruling is 'uncorrected,' it 'will institutionalize the flaws in our rule of law.' 'The impact is not only political, it's also economic. When investor confidence retracts, when costs of doing business rise, when the supply chain struggles, invariably, it's the consumers, the people, who will pay the price. Everyone needlessly suffers - as our history as a nation repeatedly taught us,' the groups said. — BAP, GMA Integrated News
