Tracking the budget: Media should provide a more comprehensive view
THE 2020 BUDGET has been passed. Alleged last-minute pork insertions amounting to at least PHP 83-billion did not stop the two houses of Congress from ratifying the budget bill on December 11. Much like its approval in the Senate and the Lower House, the bicameral decision seemed rushed, without sufficient discussion of the bill, at least, not according to the coverage.
The government’s budget for 2020 however was flagged as problematic for onerous cuts on health and education (See monitor: Nation’s eyes on Congress: Media should help!). Senator Panfilo Lacson won kudos for pointing out “pork barrel” insertions. These serious issues however did not seem to provoke critical discussion in either the House or Senate.
The media coverage of the budget has been done in parts, as the process moved through the chambers of Congress. In pieces, the public misses the comprehensive view, so necessary to appreciate the sources or causes of the problematic provisions. Reports have also missed the role of the executive in shaping the budget and the primary responsibility that the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) over the quality of the budget.
The Philippine budget process can be broken down into four phases: (1) budget preparation; (2) budget legislation; (3) budget execution; and (4) accountability. The executive has responsibility over the preparation and the execution. Congress legislates the bill into law.
Notably, reports on the budget only picks up during the legislative process which began when DBM submitted the proposal to the Lower House in August. While the Congress was able to follow its prescribed schedule, the speed of its passage in both Houses raises questions on the quality of its review. Congressional review should subject the proposed expenditures to close scrutiny, as part of the required system of check and balance. But the rush to pass reflects how much control the executive holds over Congress.
The media’s short-sighted view of the process failed to remind the public that last year, Congress did not succeed in passing the budget bill and had to re-enact the 2018 bill for 2019, causing all kinds of problems as a result, including the late funding of the Southeast Asian Games.
Much of the coverage seemed intent to showcase the supposed competence of the 17th Congress, highlighting the quick ratification of the 2020 budget. Reports however understated the fact that the hasty approval of the budget means there may be loopholes that could lead to financial abuse. Overall, media reports failed to flag the problems that arise from the subservience of the legislature to the president’s will.
CMFR monitored the leading Manila broadsheets Manila Bulletin, Philippine Daily Inquirer and The Philippine Star; the primetime newscasts (ABS-CBN 2’s TV Patrol, CNN Philippines’ News Night, GMA-7’s 24 Oras and TV5’s Aksyon) and some online news sites from December 11 to 15, 2019.
Same old breaking news
Media tended to reduce the narrative to claims and counterclaims. Few reports highlighted the drastic cuts for health and education, the president’s record-high PHP 4.5 billion intelligence fund, and the questionable insertions alleged by minority lawmakers.
Akin to the rushed budget hearings in both Houses, some lawmakers said that the House leadership “hastily” lodged the bicameral conference report for approval in the plenary, giving members less than 10 minutes to review the document before submitting it for ratification.
While media did report on the alleged insertions, much of the media’s inability to cite sources other than Sen. Panfilo Lacson framed the issue as one man’s crusade against pork barrel. Headlines called attention to Lacson’s claim that 1,253 budget items worth at least PHP 83.219 billion were allegedly inserted by the House.
Lacson told Senate reporters that he, along with Senate President Vicente C. Sotto and Senator Juan Edgardo M. Angara, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, dissected the proposed budget and identified the questionable lump sum appropriations that the House allegedly inserted at the last minute in the biÂcameral budget committee report.
This contradicted Angara’s earlier statement that both chambers of Congress had made sure that the “adjustments” in the final committee report complied with the Supreme Court’s (SC) ruling on pork barrel. The Star, meanwhile, cited Davao City Rep. Isidro Ungab, head of the House committee on appropriations, who neither confirmed nor denied the insertions. “I don’t want to comment any further because the next step will be with the Office of the President. The ball will soon be in their hands,” Ungab said.
Unfortunately, these statements called for a deeper dive on the part of reports to investigate what appropriations are out of line. But the media also failed to exercise its function as a watchdog.
Out of time
The budget process calls for a more comprehensive review of the entire process, the preparation, the legislative review, and then the execution and accountabilities involved. To do this, journalists need to do their own independent inquiry of the different phases. Focusing only on the legislative mill, unfortunately, reports quoted claims but did not bother to check what sense to make of the statements made.
Some members of the legislature were only too happy to take a piece of the budget pie for themselves. The president’s supermajority was apparently hell-bent on getting the budget passed, not just because they were on deadline, but also because the budget assured their share of the pot.
But in cheering Congress for passing the bill on time, the media failed to alert the people on how the budget had become a tool of financial abuse on the part of the powers involved.
Leave a Reply