The presidential palace has released just now a detailed list of where money that was pooled in the DAP (Disbursement Acceleration Program) went.
According to this Excel file, only P144 billion of the proposed funding of P167 billion was actually released.
I am working on another story right now.
I would appreciate very much your help in analyzing where the DAP money went.
For starters, can you find out the answers to the following questions:
1. Is there a discrepancy between what the Supreme Court said the DAP was worth in totality and what this Excel file says?
2. How much funding went to Tarlac province? (Since the Left is accusing the government of pouring too much money into Tarlac, including money that they said went to buy land from landlords under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program or CARP. Does this indicate that money went to the owners of hacienda Luisita?)
3. How much money ended up with lawmakers? Does the Excel file indicate the dates when the money was released for the lawmakers’ pork projects?
4. Are there any projects that are questionable?
5. Do you notice anything other thing interesting about the list?
6, What details are lacking which you want to know? For instance, on Twitter, @ren aguila wants to know when the money was released for each project. @John Mangun pointed out the Excel file doesn’t show when projects were completed after OP approval. As for me, I want each project in the list “clickable” – so that when I click on a given project it opens up to further details which break down the project further – like where the projects were undertaken, the cost, when it started and when it was finished. And the person in charge of the particular project.
Just post your answers as comments.
Thanks very much,
Raissa
You can download the DAP list file by clicking on this link or by clicking on the link provided in the slideshare file below or by clicking on this link that will lead you to the government website:
Related Stories
Saguisag fully backs me on DAP and shares a startling suspicion
heartaidmd says
CPMers, can you please comment on this?
DAP list ‘sanitized’ Critics accused Palace of hiding ‘pork funds’
Christine F. Herrera Jul. 16, 2014 at 12:01am
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email Share on gmail More Sharing Services
57
THE list of 116 projects funded by the Disbursement Acceleration Program released by the Palace Monday was sanitized to remove P30 billion worth of pork barrel that contributed nothing to the economy and merely promoted patronage politics, critics of the program said Tuesday.
Former national treasurer and convener of Social Watch Philippines, Leonor Magtolis Briones and Bagong Alyansang Makabayan secretary general Renato Reyes Jr. said the Palace deliberately hid the DAP funds that went to congressmen, senators and other elected local officials.
At 4:30 p.m. Monday, shortly before President Aquino delivered his speech on the DAP, the Palace released a 19-page list containing 116 DAP-identified projects worth P72.11 billion that were approved by the President on Oct. 12, 2011.
Reyes compared the Palace list to the documents submitted to the Supreme Court entitled “Respondent’s 1st Evidence Packet” and found that some funds were deliberately hidden from the Supreme Court, the President and the public.
Based on the Supreme Court document, copies of which were obtained by the Manila Standard, of the P72.11 billion, some P6.5 billion was allocated to “PDAF (Various other local projects)” in one column that was described in another column as “for augmentation.”
But in the Palace list, the term PDAF [for Priority Development Assistance Fund] was deleted.
Its description in the second column said: “This item shall fund priority local projects nationwide requested by legislators, local government officials and national agencies.”
It no longer said it was meant for “PDAF augmentation.”
“The Palace list was to deliberately mislead the public into thinking that there was no PDAF in DAP. The Palace sanitized the list. But DAP is pork barrel like PDAF,” Reyes said.
Reyes cited items 41, 73 and 100 in the Palace DAP list hidden under the name “various local projects.”
“These items are clearly pork barrel funds intended for legislators and other officials. The pork funds hide under the name various local projects. They total P17.5 billion,” Reyes told the Manila Standard.
“Now, how would increasing PDAF or congressional pork be beneficial for the economy? The Palace tried to hide these pork funds by not mentioning the PDAF connection. We doubt if Malacanang can even account for these funds. These items prove that DAP is pork just like
PDAF, contrary to what the President claims that the two are different. It is clear, DAP equals PDAF. PDAF is painted all over the DAP projects,” Reyes said.
In the Palace list, an allocation of P6.5 billion in LGU support fund was recorded. The Palace downplayed its use by describing it as “Pursuant to the President’s directives, this amount will help local governments cushion the impact of the 4.8 percent decrease in the 2012 IRA or Internal Revenue Allotment over the 2011 levels due to abrupt decrease in national internal revenue collection in 2009.”
But in the Supreme Court evidence packet, its description says, “In FY 2012, LGUs will suffer a cut in their IRA share at about P13.6 billion. To buffer the blow of the reduction, the Support Fund will be set up for LGUs requiring financial assistance to implement projects that fall under a prescribed menu. The guidelines shall be released jointly by the DILG and DBM.”
In the Palace list, the LGU support fund had a balance of P900 million that was not indicated in the Supreme Court evidence packet.
Under the Supreme Court evidence packet, an allocation of P5.432 billion for landowners’ compensation was listed for compensable lands under the agrarian reform program.
However, in the Palace list, the amount listed was P5.46 billion that was “indicated in the memo to the President but only indicated as cash release that is not included in the P72.11-billion proposed funding.”
“This item was included in the DAP as part of the disbursement strategy since it only required the release of the NCA [cash]. It already has an appropriation in the FY 2010 and FY 2011 GAA in the total amount of P7.932 billion. The cash requirement was released on Oct. 4, 2011 to beef up disbursement alongside disbursements under DAP,” the Palace list says.
The Palace list counted the P5.46 billion allocation as included in the total amount of P72.11 billion even “if it was not included in the P72.11 billion proposed funding.
“This only goes to show that Aquino started impounding the funds as early as 2010, under the national budget approved by his predecessor,” Reyes said.
President Aquino’s first national budget was deliberated on and approved in December 2011.
Briones described as “anomalous” the Palace list because it did not have details of where exactly the money went.
“How can the President say the DAP projects were graft-free when not one project has been audited and investigated by the Commission on Audit? Where are the details? Who were the beneficiaries? Who received what and how much?” Briones said.
“Instead of explaining to the public the details of the DAP, the President went on and on defending himself and the executive, saying what they did was right. And those who question them were wrong,” Briones said.
Briones and Reyes demanded a “full disclosure” of the DAP funds from the President.
“Somebody has got to be accountable for these seemingly invisible projects. Where are these projects and where did the funds go? For as long as the Palace does not come clean, doubts will continue to taint the DAP as one big source of corruption and used for political patronage,” Briones said.
raissa says
I would like Bayan Ko to release all seven evidence packets if they have them, in full, so we won’t have to go to the Supreme Court to ask for copies.
Then we can compare all the lists.
moonie says
about time renato reyes become transparent too. he ought to show the 7packets he talked about and show them for scrutiny. not hide them that only he is priveleged to access. isn’t he supportive of FOI? tapos siya pala ang patago-tago at ayaw mamigay ng information.
macspeed says
THEY PROVIDED EXCEL FILE FOR ALL EXPENSES??? WOW, that is a good thing to do, WHOEVER DID THIS HAS FULL INSTRUCTION FROM PNOY. THIS IS A FORM OF GOOD GOVERNANCE, PEOPLE HOPE THIS GOVERNMENT SITE WILL BE UPDATED REGULARLY FOR TRANSPARENCY. ALSO SHOULD BE AVAILABLE IN TV, NEWPAPER AND RADIOS FOR THE LINKS SO THE LEFTIST CAN CLICK THE SITE AND SEE THE RESULTS, THEREBY SHUTTING THEIR MOUTH.
The SPREADSHEET is a form of DATABASE, it is subject for IMPROVEMENT, such as PROVIDING HYPERLINK for each expenses, project, outcome etc.
I wish I could help seek some of the answers, but thank you Ms Raissa, the Government site is now SAVE under “favorite” he he he very nice to see where the money is. Also I can surf the site for more interesting place or rooms, I wish all government pages are open to us, I will check if there is a membership requirement, like Yahoo mail? So I can roam around the Palace he he he visit Presidential meeting room etc.
heartaidmd says
http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/business/07/15/14/world-bank-gives-vote-confidence-aquino-govt
letlet says
I won’t go after the heads of PNOY and Abad to roll down over DAP. PNOY and Abad did what they have to do to meet the needs of the common tao and to alleviate them from their sufferings I would not clamor for their punishment for their good deeds. A mistake can’t be corrected by another colossal mistake by ousting them from their poistions as we need PNOY at this most tricky times. I still support him BECAUSE HE IS ONE HECK OF A GREAT LEADER and for the sake of our country. I would rather CLAMOR for the amending / repealing of the 38, 39, and 49 AC so as not to be exploited by the next elected president / cabinet officials for the sake of our future generations, that would put a stoppage on their fingers dipping on the public funds.
vander anievas says
@letlet,
thank you. you are among the few thinking pinoys.
i am also for another term for Pnoy.
one more term and he can rid our govt of scalawags and hoodlums.
SpeakerfortheDead says
Basing from what I’ve read so far, I guess there is sound legal basis in implementing DAP. I believe SC is just becoming super strict even rigid in their interpretation of the law. Where they this strict during GMA’s time? I doubt they were. When there is conflict in the interpretation of the laws, particularly in this case, the nature of “savings”, SC is supposed to be one to render judgment. But then again, we have just learned how these “honorable” justices treat or make their own “savings” from their JDF. COA, no less, found out that the supreme court declared savings even though they have unpaid obligations of the same year. And where do these “savings” in millions of pesos go? Mostly were paid as bonuses for the justices, judges or their court personnel. In other words, sa bulsa lang din nila napupunta.
COA said that, “the procedure currently being observed by SC runs counter to the provisions of Presidential Decree 1949 that created the fund.” Ngayon, I’m sure, dahil sila naman taga-intrepret ng laws, sasabihin na naman nila di nila nilabag ang batas. Kakatawa di ba?
Yet, these are the same people who said PNOY was wrong in the way he made use of “savings”.
leona says
hahaha…Speaker for the [email protected]…I like your speaking here!
To Quote Sen. Saguisag “Spending the ‘savings’ for Kortina is a cross-border expenditure!’
Now, it can even be ‘heard’…that the dead are speaking!
Thank You Sir.
netty says
Those were very expensive kurtinas, silky or embroidered with diamonds? Miracles do happen like you Speaker for the Dead… likewise Cory seemed to resurrect her interesting signed law that is now the point of contention for DAP’s legality or vice versa. I am still with Pnoy, I just have a very big problem when people describes the president as Special child poking fun at his visible or invisible disability/mental functioning/… dissing a person that is doing GREAT THAN ANY normal senators and other honorable justices is RUDENESS.Sometime ago I took back my words and apologized to Sen. MIRIAM for joining others re: her mental condition… well maybe others are mentally comfortable making fun of the people like these.. have your way , what ever makes you happy. I am just saying we can discuss things without being personal , just focusing on the issues instead. Peace yoH !!
jorge bernas says
@ SpeakerfortheDead,
Nagtataka ako sa desisyon nang korte suprema SpeakerfortheDead kong bakit unconstitutional daw ang portion nang DAP ni Pnoy gayong sila mismong taga Supreme Court ay ginamit ang ganitong kalakaran nang pag gamit nang Savings nila pero ang pinakamasakit ay sa Bonuses/Allowances nang mga justices at empleyado nila napunta ang sinasabing SAVINGS DAW nila na bilyones na halaga nang Pera nang Taongbayan?
Please explain in tagalog Supreme Court spokeman para maintendihan nina juan at juana…
vander anievas says
may term kami sa aming probinsya: lutong makaw.
or bait-ari.
HUNGKAG says
i support the president’s position because DAP benefited the peope and the economy. without DAP there will be no stimulus spending and no progress.
andrew lim says
WASTE SEGREGATION: SORTING THE GOOD CRITICS FROM THE BAD
(A beginner’s guide to the personalities and groups opposing DAP)
The noise on the DAP issue has reached deafening levels, and it is time to classify the sectors that are doing the screeching. Just like household garbage, we need to sort them out, since many of them have very dark motives why they oppose not just the DAP, but practically everything that government does.
However, there are a few who oppose the DAP purely on principle, and they are the ones we should listen to and learn from.
The following lists are not exhaustive. There are several other groups/individuals who are actually too obscure and no longer relevant. Citing them here will only aid in giving them legitimacy.
I. EXTREME LEFTISTS AND THEIR LEGAL ALLIES
Marxist-Leninist-Maoists – Bayan Muna, Bayan, KMU, Courage, Kabataan Party List, Gabriela, LFS, Anakbayan, etc. These are the above ground representatives of the CPP-NPA-NDF.
Their objective is to seize power by any means -legal, armed struggle, parliamentary struggle.
Install a Communist party-led government that will nationalize all industries and centralize the economy. The US is the great Satan, and Russia and China were once their guiding lights. They once held a rally in Mendiola holding up portraits of Marx, Lenin, Stalin and Mao, as if they were canonized saints.
They have been at it since time immemorial. You can just insert current names into their pre-packaged slogans: “Dismantle US-(put name of current President here) Dictatorship!”
President (Insert name here), tuta ng Kano!
They will rally in the streets as full-time protesters, and will oppose every President until they install their own Party chief.
II. SUPPORTERS OF PAST CORRUPT REGIMES:
This group’s objective is payback for the hurt suffered by their patron (previous leader) and if possible, to bring down government and return to power. They have been at it since 2010.
ARROYO LOYALISTS – Rigoberto Tiglao (Manila Times) , Belinda Cunanan (booted out of the Inquirer for integrity issues and now blogging) , Augusto Syjuco, Gary Olivar (has been silent since his appointment to the Board of Directors of BDO), Alex Magno (Philippine Star).
MARCOS-ROMUALDEZ LOYALISTS-
Kit Tatad (Manila Standard) -the man who can justify the corruption of the Marcoses and proudly show off his knowledge of Catholic doctrine simultaneously.
Jojo Robles (Manila Standard) fond of inventing “unidentified sources” in his columns
note: Manila Standard is owned by a group headed by Martin Romualdez.
Oliver Lozano, the serial filer of impeachment complaints
CAMPS OF BONG REVILLA, ENRILE, ESTRADA, et al. – For obvious reasons. Kung naipit na sa PDAF, e di gumanti sa DAP.
OPPORTUNISTIC POLITICIANS – UNA camp – Binay, JV Ejercito, Toby Tiangco
Sensing an opportunity to ensure victory for the 2016 polls, they have positioned themselves accordingly.
III. PRINCIPLED CRITICS, WITH SOME HEADLESS CHICKENS
The last group is mostly composed of academics, public interest lawyers and journalists.
Ellen Tordesillas, the Stuart Santiagos, Harry Roque, Liling Briones – smart, principled people who have taught and written for a living for much of their lives. Their integrities are still intact, but they have the tendency to lose their heads on a single issue and throw to the wolves everything due to their frustrations with a policy of government. They behave like headless chickens when they disagree on a single policy of government.
Randy David, Winnie Monsod, Jarius Bondoc, Conrad de Quiros, Rene Saguisag – the best critics on the DAP. They are telling it like it is, and finds solutions to move forward. Bondoc, De Quiros and David are against the DAP, but they are not advocating the destruction of government.
CBCP – Some bishops are saying, “Pro-RH yan si Pnoy eh. So dapat sa lahat ng issue kalaban na rin.” Ha haha. Kidding aside, CBCP head Soc Villegas appeared in Tina Palma’s Talkback on ANC and has voiced a very balanced view of the subject.
Ben Diokno – very cogent arguments in his columns (Though I cannot escape the suspicion that he is angling for the Budget Secretary position once again, under a Binay regime.And why did he support Erap Estrada as Budget Secretary till the end?)
Dean Tony La Vina – of the Ateneo School of Government – very sober and even-keeled.
He should be listened to. His concerns are legitimate.
Professor Prospero de Vera, UP NCPAG- just like Dean La Vina – very balanced and considers all sides, like what you expect from a high caliber academic.
Joker Arroyo – he signed the Administrative Code of 1987 as Cory’s Executive Secretary, and may have played a role in crafting it. Flerida Ruth Romero emerges as an author, but it may have been a team from the UP Law Center. He called the use of the Administrative Code of 1987 as defense of DAP as “evil genius”. Does he mean it’s a valid defense?
There you have it. Participate in the debate, as the freedom to do that is what we fought for when we kicked out the Marcos dictatorship.
But,
Be careful that you are not dragged into supporting the agenda of the first two groups. They are wolves in sheep’s clothing!
raissa says
Ah, you analyzed this better than me.
thanks for taking the time out to write all these.
vander anievas says
nice andrew lim,
thanks for this scrutiny.
i admit i was wrong on Soc(attributed to popular bishops’s leaning)
though i missed the ANC engagement w/ Tina.
ben d is always suspect to me due to his affiliation.
who is this Liling. wala ba yang T?
joker is correct,
that admin code is pnoy’s defense.
he’s so quiet after saying that evil genius phrase.
parang hindi kasali ang mga arbiters in robes?
andrew lim says
WASTE SEGREGATION: SORTING THE GOOD CRITICS FROM THE BAD
(A beginner’s guide to the personalities and groups opposing DAP)
The noise on the DAP issue has reached deafening levels, and it is time to classify the sectors that are doing the screeching. Just like household garbage, we need to sort them out, since many of them have very dark motives why they oppose not just the DAP, but practically everything that government does.
However, there are a few who oppose the DAP purely on principle, and they are the ones we should listen to and learn from.
The following lists are not exhaustive. There are several other groups/individuals who are actually too obscure and no longer relevant. Citing them here will only aid in giving them legitimacy.
I. EXTREME LEFTISTS AND THEIR LEGAL ALLIES
Marxist-Leninist-Maoists – Bayan Muna, Bayan, KMU, Courage, Kabataan Party List, Gabriela, LFS, Anakbayan, etc. These are the above ground representatives of the CPP-NPA-NDF.
Their objective is to seize power by any means -legal, armed struggle, parliamentary struggle.
Install a Communist party-led government that will nationalize all industries and centralize the economy. The US is the great Satan, and Russia and China were once their guiding lights. They once held a rally in Mendiola holding up portraits of Marx, Lenin, Stalin and Mao, as if they were canonized saints.
They have been at it since time immemorial. You can just insert current names into their pre-packaged slogans: “Dismantle US-(put name of current President here) Dictatorship!”
President (Insert name here), tuta ng Kano!
They will rally in the streets as full-time protesters till kingdom come, and will oppose every President until they install their own Party chief.
II. SUPPORTERS OF PAST CORRUPT REGIMES:
This group’s objective is payback for the hurt suffered by their patron (previous leader) and if possible, to bring down government and return to power. They have been at it since 2010.
ARROYO LOYALISTS – Rigoberto Tiglao (Manila Times) , Belinda Cunanan (booted out of the Inquirer for integrity issues and now blogging) , Augusto Syjuco, Gary Olivar (has been silent since his appointment to the Board of Directors of BDO), Alex Magno (Philippine Star).
MARCOS-ROMUALDEZ LOYALISTS-
Kit Tatad (Manila Standard) -the man who can justify the corruption of the Marcoses and proudly show off his knowledge of Catholic doctrine simultaneously.
Jojo Robles (Manila Standard) fond of inventing “unidentified sources” in his columns
note: Manila Standard is owned by a group headed by Martin Romualdez.
Oliver Lozano, the serial filer of impeachment complaints
CAMPS OF BONG REVILLA, ENRILE, ESTRADA, et al. – For obvious reasons. Kung naipit na sa PDAF, e di gumanti sa DAP.
OPPORTUNISTIC POLITICIANS – UNA camp – Binay, JV Ejercito, Toby Tiangco
Sensing an opportunity to ensure victory for the 2016 polls, they have positioned themselves accordingly.
III. PRINCIPLED CRITICS, WITH SOME HEADLESS CHICKENS
The last group is mostly composed of academics, public interest lawyers and journalists.
Ellen Tordesillas, the Stuart Santiagos, Harry Roque, Liling Briones – smart, principled people who have taught and written for a living for much of their lives. Their integrities are still intact, but they have the tendency to lose their heads on a single issue and throw to the wolves everything due to their frustrations with a policy of government. They behave like headless chickens when they disagree on a single policy of government.
Randy David, Winnie Monsod, Jarius Bondoc, Conrad de Quiros, Rene Saguisag – the best critics on the DAP. They are telling it like it is, and finds solutions to move forward. Bondoc, De Quiros and David are against the DAP, but they are not advocating the destruction of government.
CBCP – Some bishops are saying, “Pro-RH yan si Pnoy eh. So dapat sa lahat ng issue kalaban na rin.” Ha haha. Kidding aside, CBCP head Soc Villegas appeared in Tina Palma’s Talkback on ANC and has voiced a very balanced view of the subject.
Ben Diokno – very cogent arguments in his columns (Though I cannot ignore the suspicion that he is angling for the Budget Secretary position once again, under a Binay regime.And why did he support Erap Estrada as Budget Secretary till the end?)
Dean Tony La Vina – of the Ateneo School of Government – very sober and even-keeled.
He should be listened to. His concerns are legitimate.
Professor Prospero de Vera, UP NCPAG- just like Dean La Vina – very balanced and considers all sides, like what you expect from a high caliber academic.
Joker Arroyo – he signed the Administrative Code of 1987 as Cory’s Executive Secretary, and may have played a role in crafting it. Flerida Ruth Romero emerges as an author, but it may have been a team from the UP Law Center. He called the use of the Administrative Code of 1987 as defense of DAP as “evil genius”. Does he mean it’s a valid defense?
There you have it. Participate in the debate, as the freedom to do that is what we fought for when we kicked out the Marcos dictatorship.
But,
Be careful that you are not dragged into supporting the agenda of the first two groups. They are wolves in sheep’s clothing!
[email protected] says
Hey Andrew,
Your spin so omits the obvious, the Supreme Court – the final and only arbiter that counts!
Don’t insult our intelligence.
[email protected]
andrew lim says
DEAR READERS,
PLS COMMENT ON THE USE OF THE SUPREME COURT’S SAVINGS:
http://www.rappler.com/nation/63334-coa-questions-sc-savings
They have not been following the definition of savings which they used in declaring the DAP unconstitutional, it turns out.
heartaidmd says
and, they don’t even have ‘underspending’ to base the transfer of funds on…
leona says
Hahaha…Andrew [email protected]…from your LINK, this extract says of the SC –
*The SC, however, insisted that it needs a free hand to determine which needs of the judiciary must be prioritized, as collections may not be enough to fund all the projects earmarked against the 20% portion of the JDF.*
Free hand as insisted – which needs to be prioritized.
Please read the link READERS!…it’s a COA report as published on the judiciary department.
SpeakerfortheDead says
Ang SC pala ang EVil Genius eh. It’s not the first time daw that they got creative with their budget. Creative? Di ko alam kung matatawa ako o maiinis. Ang strikto nilang mag define ng savings, “di pwede yan, ito lang dapat”, tapos sila, allowed maging CREATIVE? Bigyan ng jacket ang mga yan! haha. Kapal ng mga honorables na ito.
Rene-Ipil says
I got a confirmation of what I suspected all along that the justices deliberately ignored – the more appropriate word is HID or itinago – Section 39 of the AC from the public. As we all learned from PNoy in his speech yesterday, the DAP’s legitimacy hinged on Section 39 which gave him authority to use savings for other projects.
Indeed, Section 39 was prominently mentioned in the evidence submitted by the OSG to the SC. In page 11 of the SC decision, it was mentioned that the First Evidence Packet contained at (b) the title of a document called the Memorandum for the President dated December 12, 2011 which was the Omnibus Authority to Consolidate Savings/Unutilized Balances and their Realignment.
Fortunately, Baycas posted the full content of the said Memorandum which clearly mentioned Section 39 of AC as one of the bases for DAP. In page 41 of the decision the full text – so I thought – of same Memorandum was copied and pasted by the justices. But upon close scrutiny, the text of the portion (item no. 2) mentioning Section 39 was omitted – not a word of the law that underpinned PNoy’s “masterpiece.” And of course the discussion of Section 39 was effectively muted.
BTW, thanks to Baycas for the heads-up.
leona says
Is that OMISSION in bad faith or good faith…re Section 39?
moonie says
I reckon, bad faith ang omisyon nila. by their sheer number alone and unanimous verdict, the justices were not expecting na bubweltahan sila ni PNoy. tinago nila ang section 39, probably hoping no one will bring it up, after all, sila ang tapapag-interpret sa constitution at intimidating masyado ang apog nila, speaking a language few could understand, all were dressed in black, wearing stinky wigs! kaso lang, PNoy was not intimidated. sure, he took a punch on the chin, and hit back. bad faith ang omisyon nila.
vander anievas says
aha, sila ba ang may bad faith?
parang tama nga si erap nang sabihin niya ang popular na pronouncement niyang “hoodlums in bathrobes”.
o ayan may insertion din ako…
emong says
Kung yung Supreme Court nga ilang beses nagkamali sa pag desisyon kung constitutional or unconstitutional yung DAP eh..wala naman na reprimand… ngayon, si Abad naman na tingin ko eh tumutulong lang sa bansa eh minsan lang nagkamali, resignation agad ang gusto ng mga ibang tao diyan.. Kung titingnan mo naman yung mga personality nung mga gustong mag resign si Abad,, either:
1. Maka UNA, Pro Binay ( Tiangco, et al)
2. Maka Marcos
3. Maka Gloria ( Sujuico, et al)
4. Komunista
5. Mga kinasuhan ng Gobyerno dahil sa pagnanakaw
6. Mga lawyer na kasabwat ng mga nasa itaas
Lahat sila, may pansariling interest na isinusulong. Ngunit, kung titinangn mo,, lahat naman sila walan pa napapatunayan or naibabahagi para umunlad ang bansa.Karamihan pa nga, ninanakawan pa tayo.Tahimik naman ang taumbayan..walang malawakang rally , pwera na lang sa mga rally kuno ( mga Bayad Muna, et al). Kung wala naman nabulsa, I guess pwede natin palagpasin ang bagay na yan.. Kahit naman sa exam, kung may sampung problema, magkamali ka sa isa, pasado ka pa rin.. Lalo naman siguro kung yung sagot mo eh pwedeng tama or pwede ring mali depende sa rason.
Kung hahayaan natin na masira yung magandang nasimulan dahil lang sa issue na ito, walang mangyayari sa bansa natin.
At kung susuriin mabuti, kung meron lang sanang naipakulong na magnanakaw na senador, congressman at pangulo ang judiciary sa pangunguna ng supreme court, edi sana .. kahit may DAP or PDAF pa,, walang magnanakaw sa gobyerno..
emong says
See, even si Corona nakisawsaw na.. So I guess at this point,, who would you trust?
emong says
nasaan na ba si Ma’am Arlene?
moonie says
arlene was somewhere maybe watching the proceedings via webcam, happy, happy, happy. bet the verdict was dedicated to her, the supreme court’s favorite ‘go to girl and fix it girl’.
vander anievas says
ok ka @emong, tama ka…
Victin Luz says
Dapat mga tayong mga taga CPMERs pro PNOY or against PNOY ( pro BINAY , pro POE or pro REVILLA etc ) ay magkaisa to TELL to the WHOLE NATION what ABAD did to the Constitution , in order to attain the approval of PNOY that short cut the cross border funding of government savings….
Kung nagtuturo ka ngayon sa Elementary ng History o High School ng Philippine Government at may nagtanung na matalinong bata kung PWEDE ang ginawa ni ABAD ,,, ano ang isasagot mo ano ang isasagot ninyo… Class ganito kasi pag in GOOD FAITH ka at matutulungan mo ang nasunugan dyan sa may ibayo ay pwedi munang wag pansinin o huwag sundin ang Saligang Batas na iyan…. At saka si ABAD class Condtitutional naman daw sabi ng Supreme Court ang iba sa ginawa nya….. Hala sige ang pera na pang bili ng meryenda natin bukas ay ibigay na sa nasunugan at bahala nalang uli akong manghingi sa mga magulang ninyo…..ganito ba ang isasagot natin?
He he di bale wala namang matalinong bata na ngayon puro magugulang nalang kagaya ng mga taga , Executive, Legislative at Judiciary ,, ,,
Sa ginawa nina Enrile, Revilla, Estrada sa PDAF at ang hindi padin tuloy na pag sampa ng kaso sa mga iba pang Senadores lalong lalo na ang mga kakampi ni PNOY,,, at sa paglabas ng usaping DAP ngayon , ang mga nakasuhan sa MALAMPAYA scam,,, sino naman kay ngayon ang FILIPINO o dayuhan na gustong magbayad ng kanikanilang TOTOONG BUWIS? ZERO….
Adrian says
What makes you so sure that it’s Abad and not Aquino himself? DAP is without question, beneficial. Whether its legal or illegal, its at the least, debatable (at the moment).
leona says
Adrian…since only the ‘practices and implementing’ on DAP were declared unconstitutional and not one section or more sections of EO 294 or even the DAP Program, DAP is still legal for all intents and purposes so far.
And you are right…still debatable. In fact a Motion for Reconsideration is still to be filed with the SC.
And thank you!
yvonne says
The initial salvos have been fired.
Supreme Court declares PDAF unconstitutional
Supreme Court declares portion of DAP as unconstitutional
COA questions Supreme Court Savings.
Congress to investigate Supreme Court JDF
SB to SC: Sow how P1.7 Billion judiciary fund was spent.
And while the triad of the three branches of government are digging in for a long fight, General Bongbong and General Binay are gathering their artilleries and strengthening their offensive positions.
Martial Bonifacio says
Off-topic: Erap jokes!
“However, Estrada said he will steer clear from any proposed impeachment of Aquino, saying he is too busy running Manila.
Masyado akong busy sa Maynila eh. I don’t like to interfere with national [issues]. I’ll just watch them. I have enough problems in Manila,”
Source: http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/370268/news/nation/erap-no-need-to-move-jinggoy-to-regular-jail
Kindly ask Erap kung yung issue ni Jinggoy o ang pork barrel scam ay hindi national issue. Nahulog talaga ako sa aking upuan nung nabasa ko ito :)
yvonne says
Jinggoy + Junior + Juan + Janet = Jail
Ka Enchong says
Isama mo na rin si Jiji ;-)
baycas says
As long as Daang Matuwid is not really what it says, Bongbong and Jojo will easily win.
As long as transparency and accountability is not present with the current administration, future generations of public officials will just be the same…grafters and corrupt individuals.
yvonne says
Ang daang matuwid,
kung minsan ay may lubak.
Pero may lubak man ang daanan,
baluktot, eto’y hindi naman.
Victin Luz says
@yvonne ,,,tama si @Baycas…ang DAANG MATUWID means pag may paakakamali ka tanggapin mo ang iyong pagkakamali …Si ABAD from the start laid down a MEMO of that DAP to solicit the approval of PNOY by FALSIFIED ( ommiting the words ” respective offices ” ) provision of the Constitution … Ano ang tawag mo doon GOOD FAITH? Ganoon ba….KAYO ang nagsasabi dito at si PNOY na ginawa din daw nila Glorya,, Estrada ang paggamit ng SAVINGs na iyan and it even did not ENHANCE OUR ECONOMY ..ninakaw pa nila ,,so MALI SILA at ITO ngayon mali din si PNOY sa kagagawan ni ABAD ,,, but you and many of us here believe that such cross border funding by PNOY enhance our economy ( pero hindi lahat dahil wala pa tayong nakikitang FULL ACCOUNTING diba ) ngayon pag nanalo si BONG BONG o si GRACE POE at totoong ngang magkapatid sila ,, pwede nilang gamitin ang DAP sa maling paraan …GUSTO MO? Sil ABAD ang naabutan at nahulian ngayon kasi di mAGDUSA SYA…..panagautan nya ang pagsisinungaling nya kay PNOY ….FALSIFICATIO of PUBLIC DOCUMENTS @YVONNE …imagine palitan mo ang laman ng isang PROVISO sa ating SALIGANG BATAS…..ayaw tingnan ng mga taga Supreme Court , taga Executive at Legislative Department …. DI TAYO ngayon ang magsabi sa kanila sa buong kabayanan na HINDI tama ang ginawa ni ABAD…..sa pag sang ayon ni PNOY at pagdepensa kay ABAD kasama sya sa TUWID na DAAN nya na LUMILIKO na din…
yvonne says
@ Victin Luz, with due respect, between you and me, I will let you have the last words on Sec. Abad.
Victin Luz says
@yvonne at stake here is the future of our children , our children’s children and so on and so forth,, HONESTY – the truth , the product of what Enrile and etc DID so as the product of Marcos and Glorya DID to our country and it was almost overcome by the ” TUWID na DAAN ” of PNOY if not for that DISHONESTY of ABAD…… But PNOY can still do it if he will fire out ABAD.
Rolly V says
In order to douse further speculations, the government should also publish where the special funds of the president; which I believe also amounts to billions of pesos; was used. At least this will support their claims to justify their use of DAP. Moreover, does PNOY understand that he is making a precedent that will give and/or allow corrupt government offcials/president authority to do what he is doing now in the pretense of national development and circumvent laws of our constitution when he leaves office? He sets his budget and blames the SC for its shortfall. I find this ridiculous if not stupidity at its finest. His incessant justification of the DAP will only erode his credibility and open pandora’s box.
A summarized status report of these funded projects/allocation is warranted and should have been included.
raissa says
Er, I agree with you on transparency but this is beside the point. special funds are a different matter altogether from DAP.
Rolly V says
Thanks Raissa, but I and other legal luminaries are in the opinion that the special funds of the President is connected to the DAP since it raises a question of logic not to be considered as a salient point when some of the projects on the list released by the presidential palace could have been funded using the special funds of the president for priority projects. Why do you need to use your savings when you have other available funds on hand? I totally agree with you it is a different matter from DAP but only in the definition and not in the substance. Which brings me back to my question on RESPONSIBILITY, that you failed to or omitted to answer—who sets the budget and blamed for its shortfall? Prudence dictates that the consequences of greater accountability be anticipated with caution. Could he not have asked and lobbied for a higher budget from Congress to finance these priority projects? I really need to know your take on this matter. Thanks.
raissa says
I will discuss this in a separate pc on savings.
We have to take into account the entire national government expenditures. Not just the GAA :)
Patience.
baycas says
“Blowing the whistle” in speeches on national TV…
Jinggoy on DAP.
PNoy on JDF.
Striking similarity…just to get off the hook…
Whistle blowing?
Or veiled threat?
baycas says
http://manilastandardtoday.com/mobile/2014/07/15/war-of-the-branches
baycas says
Wag the dog.
http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/wag+the+dog.html
At this point DAP is on center stage. Possibly next, the JDF (pronounced ja-daf).
BUT don’t let JDF drown out the DAP…as Jinggoy tried to play down PDAF by the issue of DAP.
Martial Bonifacio says
Thanks for the link. I guess we will find out in Round 2: Executive v SC if Abad intentionally omitted the words “respective offices” in the DAP issue when they file the motion for reconsideration. As you and Victin pointed out he can’t claim “good faith” since words were omitted in the memo DBM realeased plus it will set a bad precedent to the next administrations DBM head.
Well political mudslinging has already started. From legislatives PDAF to executives DAP and the threat of some congressman + Pnoy against JDF.
Hopefully the tripod branches of government can still stand and work together after all the issues and the necessary reforms will be applied. If worse comes to worst the cycle will never end…. and the government will not get anything done besides “mudslinging” like the FOI. Sen. Poe kept her word while Cong. Belmonte needs to be reminded AGAIN.
Lorena says
Saan ba pwedeng pumasok yung “savings” ng Senate – which was divided into unequal Christmas bonuses? Sana yung iba non napunta sa gastos sa e-library. At saka kung tama ang mga kwenta kung totoong NGO ang pinagdalhan ng pondo e di mayroon ding pandagdag ang iba pang opisyal sa e-library.