ANGELES CITY – A stalwart of the Lakas-Kampi-CMD said yesterday that president-apparent Sen. Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III will not be stripped of huge powers over budget despite new provisions in the 2010 General Appropriations Act (GAA) which bars the president from impounding pork barrel funds.
“The fact is that there is still Presidential Decree No. 1177 which, because it has remained a law, should take precedence over the budget provision,” said reelected Nueva Ecija Rep. Rodolfo Antonino, who was Lakas-Kampi-CMD vice president for policy during the last May 10 elections.
In an interview with Punto Central Luzon, Antonino said PD 1177 gives any president considerable powers in dispensing funds in the budget.
The decree was issued on July 30, 1977 during martial law by the late Pres. Marcos. It was titled “Revising the Budget Process in Order to Institutionalize the Budgetary Innovations of the New Society.”
Section 88 of the decree says: “The President may supplement, change, adjust, modify or amend those provisions of this Decree and other pertinent laws which govern the expenditure of appropriated funds, including changes in rates otherwise specified.”
This decree, Antonino said, would continue to empower the next president to wield enough power over coffers for projects to be implemented by various government agencies in congressional districts.
Earlier, House Appropriations Committee Vice-Chairman Edcel Lagman said that under Section 67 of the 2010 General Appropriations Act (GAA), the president is already barred from impounding pork barrel funds. He also said the pork barrel “will serve neither as a carrot nor a stick in the administration party’s announced enterprise to raid and recruit representatives from the other political parties to beef up its bid for the Speakership.”
During her administration which ends on June 39, Pres. Arroyo has been known to have withheld the pork barrel funds also known as priority development assistance funds (PDAF) of congressmen critical of her administration. The P70 million-per-congressman yearly appropriation has been used by the Executive to keep the loyalties of its allies in Congress.
Antonino noted, however, that there have been similar cases of apparent conflict between legislations passed in Congress and those already signed into law, as in the case of Sec. 67 of the 2010 budget and PD 1177.
“We have many laws but not all were passed clean cut. There have been instances of conflicts and in such cases, the final adjudication belongs to the Supreme Court,” he said.
He noted, however, that Sec. 67 of the 2010 budget was initiated by the opposition and later supported by administration lawmakers.
Insisting that Aquino would still retain enough power over the budget to influence Congress, Antonino said he nevertheless believed that the next president would not use such power as Aquino had previously indicated in his statements.
“In such a case, I don’t expect that the apparently conflict between the Marcos decrees and the new budget provision would be raised for adjudication,” he said.
Earlier, Pres. Arroyo was quoted to have said that the increases in appropriations introduced by Congress in the budget were taken from reductions made in appropriations for foreign debt interest payments.
“Since by law, I am duty bound to honor the sovereign obligations of our government, I am constrained to provide cash support for interest payments despite reduction in appropriations made by Congress. The political party of the President-apparent cannot use the non-release of the PDAF as a threat to representatives coming from other parties who refuse to join the Liberal Party,” she said.
Earlier, Quezon City Rep. Feliciano Belmonte , Jr,, Liberal Party’s candidate for House Speaker, said Mrs. Arroyo always vetoed the provision disallowing the president from withholding the pork barrel from congressmen.
“It’s a naughty thing. It’s the sort of thing GMA has been vetoing all this time. Now the party made it a booby trap for the new administration, on the guise of giving power to the Speaker. At any rate common, sense dictates control of money is in the executive. Still that’s a provision in the current budget. So we have to find legal ways of coping with it,” Belmonte was quoted to have said.
“The fact is that there is still Presidential Decree No. 1177 which, because it has remained a law, should take precedence over the budget provision,” said reelected Nueva Ecija Rep. Rodolfo Antonino, who was Lakas-Kampi-CMD vice president for policy during the last May 10 elections.
In an interview with Punto Central Luzon, Antonino said PD 1177 gives any president considerable powers in dispensing funds in the budget.
The decree was issued on July 30, 1977 during martial law by the late Pres. Marcos. It was titled “Revising the Budget Process in Order to Institutionalize the Budgetary Innovations of the New Society.”
Section 88 of the decree says: “The President may supplement, change, adjust, modify or amend those provisions of this Decree and other pertinent laws which govern the expenditure of appropriated funds, including changes in rates otherwise specified.”
This decree, Antonino said, would continue to empower the next president to wield enough power over coffers for projects to be implemented by various government agencies in congressional districts.
Earlier, House Appropriations Committee Vice-Chairman Edcel Lagman said that under Section 67 of the 2010 General Appropriations Act (GAA), the president is already barred from impounding pork barrel funds. He also said the pork barrel “will serve neither as a carrot nor a stick in the administration party’s announced enterprise to raid and recruit representatives from the other political parties to beef up its bid for the Speakership.”
During her administration which ends on June 39, Pres. Arroyo has been known to have withheld the pork barrel funds also known as priority development assistance funds (PDAF) of congressmen critical of her administration. The P70 million-per-congressman yearly appropriation has been used by the Executive to keep the loyalties of its allies in Congress.
Antonino noted, however, that there have been similar cases of apparent conflict between legislations passed in Congress and those already signed into law, as in the case of Sec. 67 of the 2010 budget and PD 1177.
“We have many laws but not all were passed clean cut. There have been instances of conflicts and in such cases, the final adjudication belongs to the Supreme Court,” he said.
He noted, however, that Sec. 67 of the 2010 budget was initiated by the opposition and later supported by administration lawmakers.
Insisting that Aquino would still retain enough power over the budget to influence Congress, Antonino said he nevertheless believed that the next president would not use such power as Aquino had previously indicated in his statements.
“In such a case, I don’t expect that the apparently conflict between the Marcos decrees and the new budget provision would be raised for adjudication,” he said.
Earlier, Pres. Arroyo was quoted to have said that the increases in appropriations introduced by Congress in the budget were taken from reductions made in appropriations for foreign debt interest payments.
“Since by law, I am duty bound to honor the sovereign obligations of our government, I am constrained to provide cash support for interest payments despite reduction in appropriations made by Congress. The political party of the President-apparent cannot use the non-release of the PDAF as a threat to representatives coming from other parties who refuse to join the Liberal Party,” she said.
Earlier, Quezon City Rep. Feliciano Belmonte , Jr,, Liberal Party’s candidate for House Speaker, said Mrs. Arroyo always vetoed the provision disallowing the president from withholding the pork barrel from congressmen.
“It’s a naughty thing. It’s the sort of thing GMA has been vetoing all this time. Now the party made it a booby trap for the new administration, on the guise of giving power to the Speaker. At any rate common, sense dictates control of money is in the executive. Still that’s a provision in the current budget. So we have to find legal ways of coping with it,” Belmonte was quoted to have said.
