Senator Ping Lacson scored an early win in his efforts to ensure transparency in the budget process, after he set two demands to which Senate finance committee chairman Win Gatchalian agreed.
Following a “solution-finding discussion”, Lacson said Gatchalian agreed to name the proponents of the amendments on the floor, to put it on record.
“We agreed that when any of our colleagues will seek clarification on particular insertions or realignments or amendments, then the chairman of the finance committee will divulge the identity or identities of the proponents of the amendments on the floor, to make it of record,” the veteran legislator said in his manifestation during the discussion of amendments to Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 4, which aims to ensure transparency in deliberations for the 2026 budget.
“I agreed as well to divulge the history and justifications of the amendments.”
Gatchalian added he agreed as well to divulge the history and justifications of the amendments.
“This is part of the committee report, then that means the chairman of the finance committee has already reviewed, analyzed, and made sure that those amendments are well-justified. So the chairman of the committee on finance can elaborate and also reveal the history of those changes, because as your chairman I have to justify those changes in the committee report. Meaning I have to study very well the justifications and the history of the proposed amendments,” the veteran legislator explained.
The seasoned lawmaker had also agreed to upload online the details of movements in the budget particularly within the Senate, before the committee report and the approval of the second reading. The senator also appealed to fellow lawmakers who will propose amendments to assist the finance committee in looking for sources of funding for such amendments.
Also, Gatchalian said that in between the committee report and the approval of the second reading, senators will get a chance to look at the movements between the General Appropriations Bill and the committee report, and ask questions on the augmented budget of some agencies and the deducted budget of others.
“So this is a time for our members to propound questions and during that time we can elaborate the justification on why those budget movements happened,” he said.
“It is for transparency.”
“I agreed to the proposal, as well as the agreement made by the distinguished sponsor because the outcome is the same. It is for transparency,” Lacson said.
He recently pushed for full budget transparency by making public the proponents of insertions and realignments in the budget bill, regardless of “complexities.” Lacson said this is to make the proponents answerable for flood control and infrastructure projects that turn out to be substandard or ghost works.
Without such transparency, he said Senate Concurrent Resolution 4 will not achieve its purpose of ensuring transparency in deliberations for the 2026 budget.
