Could such confirmation be damning to HOR and Senate flawed budgetting process. Such expensive expenditures not complying with Constituional Mandate and to ordinary process of budgetting. The Pres even noted insertions, which he dared not touch with with his line veto. And even difficulties with DILG budget. Such lack of professionalism, diligence and responsiblity
Just recently the OP reverted some funds cut from the budget of DILG towards acquisition of 911 equipment. Only HOR can amend the budget; the OP can not do it. This also meant that the budget was flawed from the start and now a lot of problems are coming up The preparation of the budget probably lacked discernment, proper processing and correct leadership
Some were noted on alleged slip ups: 1. The blank bicam report 2, The OP budget was higher than the NEP submitted.
Is there a violation, is someone culpable? Is this an impeachable offense? Was the Pres. properly advised by EA a former member of the judiciary?
Ano ang totoo: may blanks or walang blanks sa Bicam report? Ilang mga senador sabi walang blanks
Pero Pres. sis. did not sign the bicam report because there were blanks; Rep. Raoul Manuel confirmed that there were blanks. The emailiing of soft copy and last minute furnishing of hard copy contributed to the confusion.
Former President RRD and Cong. Sid Ungab, former head of Appropiations Committee at Congress before Elizalde Co, took note that the bicam conference report had blanks, there is no published 2025 budget yet. That the signed bicam report as basis of 2025 GAA with blanks (also signed) violate the constitution (since only Congress can approve budget and no such bodies as bicam. Many changes, deletion and insertion took place in bicam reports. Also, it is provided that Congress can not increase budget that is higher provided in NEP. Yet the OP budget ballooned.
Palace PBBM says the allegation are fake news.
Clearly some negligence violation of the constitution happened in the 2025 budget. Dep Ed got lower budget than DPWH. (The constitution provides for higher budget of Dep Ed. Someone did not read or has not memorized the 1987 constituion.
Vic Rodriguez clarified that the evidentiary evidence had blanks. The Palace maybe inserted in the final version. But the bicam report bore the smoking gun.
Is this not too much negligence, garapalan, and gross violation of constitution and must be stopped?
