Press Release
November 3, 2013

...asks for proper forum to fully discuss disbursement program's details

Senator Nancy Binay today said it would more appropriate if the Palace will wait for the final ruling of the Supreme Court rather than argue the merits of the controversial Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) on national television.

"The case is already pending in the Supreme Court. It is prudent for all of us to just wait for the final decision of the High Tribunal," Binay said.

"If we really want to explain the benefits, the purpose of this 'impounding mechanism,' then it would be more appropriate if the DBM explains this in detail at the proper forum wherein the facts of the DAP can be scrutinized and discussed," she added.

Binay was referring to a resolution filed by fellow Senator JV Ejercito last month seeking an inquiry into the DAP facility, urging for the 'proper Senate Committee' to examine the mechanism.

In Senate Resolution No. 287, Sen. Ejercito said that the DAP should be further examined following allegations that the funds released through the program came from the government's slow-moving projects and not from savings. This, according to Ejercito, may be considered to be in violation of the Constitution.

Binay said "that in order to clear, once and for all, the air of doubt surrounding the DAP, the 'proponent' should have been the one explaining his work to the public and not his principal," indicating that Department of Budget and Management Sec. Florencio Abad should explain, before the Senate, the mechanism of the DAP--its intent, fund sourcing and expenditure procedures and processes.

"Since we are very keen in checking every detail on how our government is using its funds, it is just as important that we look into where the funding for DAP was sourced and how it was spent--o paano ito maaaring abusuhin," she said.

"President Aquino mentioned the projects where the DAP was used but let's look further as to what were these projects, did these really need to be accelerated and prioritized? Who really benefitted from these projects?" Binay asked.

The lady senator likewise said that the Senate inquiry would be different from the Supreme Court hearing as it may touch and discuss certain dimensions of the program, citing that the Senate is after an "structural inquiry rather than a legal examination."

Binay added that that Sec. Abad should have spared the President from explaining DAP since the budget secretary would be the best resource person to defend the disbursement program.

News Latest News Feed