Overview: Allegations of pork barrel in the 2026 budget
A coalition of civil society organizations has accused the House of Representatives of embedding pork-barrel-like pork and patronage-based projects in the proposed 2026 national budget. The People’s Budget Coalition asserts that the House Budget Amendments Review Subcommittee inserted billions into programs they describe as politically driven, patronage-fueled, or opaque in nature.
What the coalition says is at stake
The group points to programs such as the Department of Social Welfare and Development’s Aid to Individuals in Crisis, the Department of Labor and Employment’s Tulong Panghanapbuhay sa Ating Disadvantaged/Displaced Workers, and the Department of Health’s Medical Assistance to Indigent and Financially Incapacitated Patients as examples of allocations that could be used for political ends. They argue these items, along with opaque line items like confidential funds and unprogrammed funds, undermine transparency and accountability in the budget process.
Impact claimed by the watchdog
According to the coalition, these allocations amount to pork-barrel funding that could entrench political patronage, limiting public access to services to those who secure the favors of lawmakers. They estimate at least P230 billion remains in pork-barrel and patronage-based projects, separate from local infrastructure funds and sizeable unprogrammed appropriations.
Response from the House
House appropriations senior vice chair Albert Garcia rejected the pork-barrel characterization, insisting the items cited are ordinary government programs that continue to benefit the poor. He named programs like MAIFIP, TUPAD, and AICS as examples of ongoing, legitimate initiatives whose budgets were debated and approved during hearings and plenary sessions.
House defense: ongoing reform and adjustments
Garcia noted that, for 2026, the House is adjusting unprogrammed appropriations in response to public concerns and committee deliberations. He described the budget process as “an ongoing work in progress” aimed at improving responsiveness to people’s needs and ensuring prudent spending. He also stressed that deliberations involve inputs from both the majority and minority blocs, and that changes follow through from hearings to plenary approval.
What the coalition calls for
The People’s Budget Coalition urges reallocating questioned funds to core, rules-based social protection, health, agriculture, and sustainable transportation programs, arguing these areas are severely underfunded. They also point to broader priorities: faster land distribution of remaining private agricultural lands and more robust investments in health and transport infrastructure, which they say deserve greater budgetary attention rather than politically driven allocations.
Next steps in the budget process
The National Expenditure Program begins with an initial review by the House of Representatives. After the General Appropriations Bill passes the House, it undergoes further scrutiny, and a bicameral conference committee then reconciles differences with the Senate’s version. Senate President Tito Sotto has previously indicated that insertions during deliberations are part of the regular budget process, a stance that the coalition disputes as undermining public trust.
Looking ahead
As the budget moves through the process, advocates say restoring integrity and public trust is essential. The debate highlights the tension between funding essential public services and ensuring transparency to prevent patronage. Both sides agree that the outcomes must reflect the needs of ordinary Filipinos and align with constitutional and legal standards for public expenditure.
