Speaker says budget debates will be open to watchdogs, vows ghost projects probe
Romualdez made the call after President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos, Jr. said in his fourth State of the Nation Address (SONA) that he will veto any proposed budget bill by Congress that will not be in harmony with his administration's programs and priorities.
'Now, we turn to the cornerstone of governance: the national budget. The House of the People in the 20th Congress will not merely pass a budget. It will reshape how government spends, saves, and serves. We will open the bicameral conference to civil society observers—a historic first,' Romualdez said in a speech.
'Because transparency is not just a value; it is a weapon against corruption. We will allow the participation of watchdogs in all budget deliberations—from committee to plenary. Aside from opening the process to the watchdogs, the public can keep abreast of the budget process by watching it on television and other social media platforms,' he added.
In addition, Romualdez vowed to strengthen the House's authority to investigate by conducting mid-year performance reviews of agencies and review of infrastructure projects.
'We heard the President's SONA. We take to heart his call—his frustration, even—about the lingering shadow of corruption in our institutions. As Speaker, I share his concern. And I accept his challenge — not with defensiveness, but with determination,' he said.
'That is why the House of Representatives will launch a comprehensive congressional review of infrastructure projects and fund implementation.'
Those lined up for congressional investigation include:
• ghost projects,
• bloated contracts,
• chronic underspending, and
• abuse of discretion in fund realignment and procurement.
In preventing these, the Speaker said the House will push for the passage of legislation that requires real-time public reporting of project progress and fund use, mandatory performance standards for contractors and agencies, and a national infrastructure audit framework.
'We are not here to cover up. We are here to clean up,' Romualdez added. — BM, GMA Integrated News
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
_2025_07_12_19_30_14.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
GMA Network
3 hours ago
- GMA Network
Ex-DICT exec warns vs ‘oversimplified' Konektadong Pinoy Bill provisions
A former Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT) official issued a warning of what he said are 'oversimplified' provisions of the Konektadong Pinoy Bill, which was passed in the 19th Congress. In a statement provided to GMA News Online on Thursday, former DICT undersecretary Jeffrey Ian Dy urged President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. to veto the proposed measure to improve its provisions by the 20th Congress. Dy said Section 16 of the proposed measure left out some details concerning the data transmission supply chain and overlooked the market dynamics of the industry. He pointed out that the bill regulates Data Transmission Industry Players (DTIP) and forces them to share infrastructure with other players but does not mandate telecommunications facilities used by malls, subdivisions, and real estate developers to do the same. 'For example, it would have been easier for PTEs to provide service if all malls are required to put in neutral access points and pico cell sites, which can be used by any internet service provider (ISP) or PTE (Public Telecommunications Entity),' Dy said. He added that the bill did not tackle the cause of high internet costs in the country despite malls and some real estate developers charging costly fees for constructing telco infrastructures. Dy further noted that the penal provisions of the bill are against DTIPs and not against 'lessors, real estate developers, and landlords who refuse to implement technologically neutral co-shared data transmission facilities.' 'There is no mandate for use of a co-shared active and passive data infrastructure,' the former DICT official said. He also raised a question on how Section 16 of the bill will deal with international consortia, as all submarine cables in the US are prohibited from transporting data to China, for example. 'These international consortia usually have a local PTE as partners. But the local partners do not usually dictate the price, terms of interconnection, or internet traffic sharing rules,' he said. Further, Dy raised concerns over the country's national security and the problem of satellite operators. Citing a Chinese company's 15,000 km fiber network in northern Luzon, Dy said it cannot be denied that it will connect and supply internet to households in the area once the bill passes. 'Yes, it could offer cheaper internet, but perhaps at the cost of National Security. North Luzon is important to our national defense as it has direct access and view to two major bodies of sea, which are potential flashpoints of conflict in this Region,' he said. 'The Philippines cannot, at the moment, independently verify and control satellite operations operating above Philippine airspace,' he added. GMA Integrated News has reached out to DICT for comment. DICT Secretary Henry Aguda had expressed support for the bill, saying that the 'increased competition will be good for the industry,' as they could divert revenues from end-users to wholesale, as new entrants could tap into their existing internet infrastructure. — Mariel Celine Serquiña/RF, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
4 hours ago
- GMA Network
Romualdez: VP Sara impeach raps filed 'out of duty, not out of spite'
The House of Representatives' decision to file an impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte is a matter of duty and not about a supposed power play, Speaker and Leyte Rep. Martin Romualdez said Thursday. Romualdez issued the statement a day after the Senate decided to archive the impeachment case against the Vice President even if the House currently has a pending appeal on the Supreme Court decision declaring the impeachment case unconstitutional. 'Why the rush? [to archive]? The Constitution is clear: only the House has the exclusive power to initiate impeachment. That power is final within its sphere. We exercised that power lawfully, transparently, and in good faith—not out of spite, but out of duty. Not to attack, but to ask for answers—answers the Vice President never gave,' Romualdez said. The speaker also questioned the Senate's move as he maintained that the case "remains active." 'To archive is, in effect, to bury the Articles of Impeachment. Yet, the ruling of the Supreme Court is not final. On August 5, the House filed a Motion for Reconsideration. The Court found our arguments serious enough to require the respondents, including the Vice President, to submit their comment. The case is active,' Romualdez added. Romualdez, a lawyer, then argued that the Articles of Impeachment against the Vice President followed the Constitution's mechanism in exacting accountability on public officials, not a mere power play. 'More than one-third of House Members signed the verified complaint. Under the Constitution, that triggered the automatic transmittal of the Articles of Impeachment. No referral to the committee was needed. No further plenary action was required. The process was complete,' Romualdez said. 'Playground' Senate President Francis 'Chiz' Escudero on Wednesday asked members of the House of Representatives to refrain from trying to use the Senate as a tool to go after political adversaries. 'To the House of Representatives I say, do not allow yourselves to be used for the blind hatred and ambition of a few who did things haphazardly, gravely abused their discretion, and violated due process, rights under the Constitution as found by the High Court itself,' the Senate president said. Escudero made the remark as he explained his vote for archiving the articles of impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte. "To these people, I say this: the Senate is not your playground to run after your political enemies. We are not an accomplice in any grand scheme,' Escudero said. Romualdez, however, said that the impeachment raps was "never about political maneuvering." "It was about accountability anchored on verified facts and sworn documents. Yet we have been met with personal attacks, sweeping accusations, and a narrative that seeks to reduce a solemn constitutional duty into mere power play. That's not just unfair—it is dangerous. It undermines public trust in the very tools of democratic checks and balances,' said Romualdez. Romualdez also insisted that the impeachment case was not "haphazardly" done. 'Let's be clear: The filing of the complaint was not rushed. What was rushed—remarkably—was its burial,' Romualdez said. 'Tuloy ang laban: For the Constitution, for the rule of law, and for the enduring truth that no public office is ever beyond the reach of accountability,' Romualdez added. —VAL, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
5 hours ago
- GMA Network
House leaders to Imee: You cannot dictate on us
House leaders on Thursday called out Senator Imee Marcos over her suggestion that the House should replace Speaker and Leyte Representative Martin Romualdez instead of pushing for the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte. Senator Marcos made the call in light of the Senate vote to transfer to the archives the articles of impeachment against Duterte. The Supreme Court earlier declared the articles of impeachment as unconstitutional. The House of Representatives has filed a motion of reconsideration. 'Sa mga mahal kong kongresista, may suggestion po ako. Ito ay suggestion lang naman ano, 'wag niyong masamain. Kaysa inaatupag ninyong palitan ang pinili ng taumbayan, binoto, at minahal, bakit 'di ninyo na lang palitan ang taong kayo naman lang ang pumili,' Marcos said. (To my dear congressmen, I have a suggestion. This is just a suggestion, don't take it personally. Instead of trying to remove a person whom the people chose, voted for, and loved, why don't you just replace the person you chose yourself?) 'Ayaw paawat ng iba sa kaka-flex! Ano kaya kung ang Speaker ninyo na lang ang palitan ninyo? Kaya ninyo 'yan,' she added. (Others keep on flexing. Why don't you just change your Speaker? You can do it.) To which, House Senior Deputy Speaker David Suarez responded: 'This is a blatant overreach into the affairs of a co-equal chamber. Let me be clear: No senator, regardless of stature or history, has the right to dictate who should lead the House.' 'That decision [on who will serve as Speaker of the House] rests solely with the elected members of this chamber, and Speaker Romualdez continues to enjoy our overwhelming confidence,' Suarez said in a statement. Likewise, Suarez said Romualdez acted well within the Constitution when he presided over the transmittal of Articles of Impeachment against the Vice President to ensure accountability. 'What we are seeing here [from Senator Marcos] is not a call for accountability. It's a classic deflection from the real issues raised in the impeachment case,' Suarez said. House Deputy Speaker Paolo Ortega V of La Union agreed, saying that Senator Marcos' statement is nothing but an attempt to stage a political circus. 'Strong statements may grab headlines, but they do little to uphold the dignity of our institutions. We must not allow a legitimate constitutional process like impeachment to be dragged into a political circus,' Ortega said. 'The Speaker did not act alone. This was a collective institutional decision—one rooted in the Constitution. Calls for his removal overlook that fact and risk personalizing what is, at its core, a constitutional process.' House Deputy Majority Leader Zia Adiong of Lanao del Sur, for his part, said Senator Marcos' tirade at Speaker Romualdez is a cheap shot. 'Her call to replace Speaker Romualdez is unwarranted, undemocratic, and unwise. This is not about Speaker Romualdez. This is about the institutional mandate of the House to initiate impeachment. Trying to pin this all on one man is a cheap political trick,' Adiong said. Instead of attacking Romualdez, Adiong said senators should focus on their constitutional duty to try impeached officials, not run away from it. 'The Speaker does not serve at the pleasure of the Senate. He serves because the House overwhelmingly trusts him to lead us in a time of great political responsibility. Maybe the better question is: Why is the Senate avoiding accountability? Why archive a complaint when the Supreme Court hasn't even ruled with finality yet?' Adiong said. 'When over 200 members vote in favor of impeachment, that's not just one man's decision. That's the House speaking as an institution. Calling it a political maneuver is not only unfair, but severely misleading,' Adiong added. — RSJ, GMA Integrated News
