House Urged to Review Parliamentary Courtesy Amid Budget Scrutiny

A LAWMAKER urged the House of Representatives to review its practice of extending parliamentary courtesy to the President and Vice-President, saying the tradition should not prevent lawmakers from scrutinizing their proposed budgets. Party-list Rep. Leila M. de Lima, a House senior minority leader, told BusinessWorld that parliamentary courtesy is rooted in respect for a co-equal branch of government and former House members, but should not undermine the public’s right to transparency and accountability. “While this courtesy does not completely limit legislators’ oversight duty, the practice becomes problematic when controversial issues are raised but not entertained,” she said in a Viber message, referring to committee-level budget deliberations. Her remarks followed the House Committee on Appropriations’ swift approval last week of the P10.2-billion proposed 2027 budget for the Office of the President and P785.2 million for the Office of the Vice-President. Missed opportunities to question officials at the committee level could limit lawmakers’ ability to seek clarifications because of time constraints during hearings and plenary deliberations, Ms. de Lima said. She said the practice should be reconsidered amid corruption concerns involving flood control projects, confidential funds and unprogrammed appropriations. “The public deserves to know how their taxes are spent,” she said. “As legislators and fiscalizers, we owe it to the Filipino people as their representatives to ensure that every peso allocated to government agencies is properly scrutinized and used for the benefit of our citizens.” “Public welfare, transparency and accountability must always prevail over parliamentary courtesy or tradition,” she added. Hansley A. Juliano, a political science instructor at the Ateneo de Manila University, said the practice reflects longstanding concerns over the House’s dependence on the Palace for political patronage at the expense of its institutional independence. “The fact that this is even a practiced or invoked norm belies the longstanding critique of ‘presidential bandwagon,’” Mr. Juliano said in a Facebook Messenger chat, referring to concerns over the House’s dependence on the Office of the President. Invoking cross-branch cooperation does not sufficiently justify the practice, particularly when the occupants of the presidential and vice-presidential offices face public scrutiny, he said. “There is practically none,” Mr. Juliano said when asked whether there is a valid distinction between respecting the President or Vice-President and subjecting their offices to the same level of budget scrutiny as other government agencies. Giving the executive offices what amounts to a “blank check” could reinforce “a culture of entitlement” while undermining the system of checks and accountability between branches of government, he added. The House should reconsider the practice because lawmakers in both chambers have separate electoral mandates from the President, Mr. Juliano said. Doing so would be necessary if Congress is “genuinely serious in maintaining their institutional credibility,” he added.