Overview: A push for lower prices and cleaner processes
Batangas’ 1st district Rep. Leandro Legarda Leviste has publicly thanked Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Secretary Vince Dizon for engaging with his call to temper the cost of DPWH projects. The exchange highlights a broader effort to rein in high infrastructure prices and to reform how budgets are allocated for 2027 onward. Leviste expressed optimism that a price reduction, guided by a geography-based computation of costs, could help curb what he terms a culture of corruption tied to inflated project figures.
What Leviste asked for and why
In a series of public statements and letters, Leviste pressed Secretary Dizon to issue a Department Order (DO) that would lower Detailed Unit Price Analysis (DUPA) and Approved Budget for the Contract (ABC) across all DPWH projects by an average of 25 percent. He argued that a standardized, geography-specific adjustment would reveal true project costs and reduce room for kickbacks or inflated estimates. Leviste’s calls rose from a conviction that a healthier price framework can lead to more competitive bidding and better value for public funds.
Dizon’s response and what ‘soon’ might mean
During a press conference on Friday, October 10, Dizon acknowledged Leviste’s concerns and expressed willingness to consider lower project prices. He said the exact amount would vary by geographical area and promised a detailed DO that would show how much prices decrease in each region. “We absolutely welcome the suggestions of Congressman Leviste. We are already working on this, this will be coming very soon,” Dizon stated, adding that the geographic breakdown would explain the degree of reduction for different localities.
Transparency as a pillar of reform
Beyond price reductions, Leviste underscored the need for DPWH to disclose data on budget insertions and project allocations. He called on the department to share information on which projects are allocable, which are non-allocable, and details about what proponents and so-called leadership funds are intended to cover. The Batangueño representative suggested that clearer data would empower Congress to scrutinize the 2026 budget and help ensure that 2027 budget planning is not contaminated by questionable insertions or hidden costs.
The potential impact on the 2026 and 2027 budgets
Leviste pointed out that the revised budget proposed by Dizon in September did not apply down to the level of all remaining DPWH projects, as flood-control projects were removed while other NEP-inserted items remained intact. He argued that merely trimming a portion of the portfolio would misrepresent progress toward lower costs and could delay genuine reform. “We should not wait until the 2027 budget to stop kickbacks and questionable insertions in the DPWH budget,” he said, emphasizing the urgency of immediate action in 2026.
Next steps and what to watch for
As the conversation evolves, observers will be watching closely for the details of the Department Order, the geographic pricing breakdown, and the specific mechanisms DPWH will employ to prevent manipulation of the bidding and budgeting processes. If implemented as described, a 25 percent average reduction would be a landmark shift in how infrastructure projects are priced and deployed, potentially affecting tendering, procurement timelines, and project delivery.
Conclusion: A test of accountability and public trust
The exchange between Leviste and Dizon places transparency and cost control at the forefront of the DPWH agenda. By embracing a geography-based price framework and committing to clearer data disclosures, the administration could demonstrate a meaningful commitment to reducing corruption risks while delivering more value to taxpayers. As Leviste noted, the goal is not merely a one-off price cut, but a systemic reform that makes future infrastructure budgeting less susceptible to kickbacks and opaque insertions.
