Gatchalian Seeks Probe Into Alleged Mishandling of POGO-Related Deportations and Flags Major Issues in 2026 DPWH Budget
📅 September 2025
📍 Senate Finance Committee Hearing – 2026 National Expenditure Program (NEP)
At a recent Senate Finance Committee hearing, Senator Win Gatchalian raised serious concerns about the Department of Budget and Management’s (DBM) lack of scrutiny over Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) flood control projects listed in the 2026 National Expenditure Program (NEP). The hearing, initially set to review the upcoming budget, took a sharp turn when Gatchalian and several senators pointed out multiple red flags in the proposed allocations.
🛠️ How Do Projects Enter the NEP?
Senator Gatchalian asked:
“How do DPWH flood control projects pass the NEP?”
DBM officials explained that DPWH submits projects via an online system using a form known as BP202. However, DBM admitted they do not review the actual details of these projects—such as location accuracy, feasibility studies, or potential duplications. The vetting focuses only on formatting, completeness of attachments, and basic duplication checks—not on the technical soundness or legitimacy of the projects.
🚨 Senate Identifies 6 Major Red Flags:
-
No Specific Locations (No Station Numbers)
Projects are vaguely labeled—e.g., “Construction of breakwater – Quezon”—with no mention of barangay, river kilometer, or coordinates. -
Duplicate Projects
The same bridge or structure appears more than once, with identical names, locations, and budgets—raising the risk of double funding. -
Divided into Phases or Packages
Projects are split into parts with similar or identical funding amounts. Senators suspect this may be a tactic to inflate budgets under the guise of phased construction. -
Rounded Project Costs
A suspicious number of projects are listed as exactly ₱100M, ₱75M, or ₱50M—raising doubts about whether engineering estimates were actually conducted. -
Coded Entries
Some projects are written with vague or inconsistent code names, reducing transparency and making tracking more difficult. -
Repeat Entries from 2025
Several projects already funded in 2025 appear again in the 2026 budget, such as the “Construction of flood mitigation structure – Agoo River,” listed with the same cost.
🔥 Senators React Strongly
Sen. Gatchalian:
“You DBM, you release a budget but there is no due diligence? You’re just like paper passersby.”
Sen. Tulfo:
“How do we know there’s no pork barrel here? This looks worse than the Napoles scam—we’re talking billions.”
Sen. Bam Aquino:
“Let’s make an exception this year. Return the entire DPWH budget to Malacañang and come back with a version free of red flags.”
⚠️ Key Issues Highlighted
-
No Feasibility Studies Checked
-
Potential for Budget Inflation
-
Ghost and Duplicate Projects
-
Weak DBM Accountability
-
Pork Barrel-Like Patterns Emerging
📌 Recommendations
-
Return DPWH budget to the Executive for revision
-
Implement stricter vetting within DBM
-
Introduce full transparency, with project coordinates and detailed costing
-
Create an audit trail of who encoded questionable entries
🗣️ Quote of the Day
“The unfortunate one here is the President — it looks like he is being fooled by his own agency. The even more unfortunate one is the people.” – Sen. Raffy Tulfo