Palace Admits PGMA Overspent Over P1 Billion
Note: this picture was just downloaded from the web. I didn't edit it.
Malacañang admitted yesterday that the Office of the President had exceeded its budget allocation for travel expenses by over P1 billion from 2001 to 2009 but insisted that there was nothing wrong with it.
Deputy Executive Secretary for administration and finance Susana Vargas presented figures showing the overspending at a press briefing in Malacañang yesterday.
Vargas disclosed that P1.4 billion had been allocated for local and foreign trips of the Office of the President (OP) from 2001 to 2009 but the actual amount spent was close to P2.5 billion.
Vargas noted that on a yearly basis, the OP received P130 million for travel expenses until 2007, when the figure was raised to P170 million and then to P244.6 million each for 2008 and this year.
Malacañang’s disclosure came on the heels of an announcement by Bukidnon Rep. Teofisto Guingona III that the OP exceeded its travel budget by P1.3 billion from 2002 to 2008. Guingona said his figures were provided by the Commission on Audit (COA).
But Vargas explained that there was nothing irregular about the OP’s travel expenses and that it was allowed to draw from “savings” on other items in the miscellaneous and other operating expenditures provision in the OP’s budget.
She said that most of the additional funds needed for the travels were taken from the maintenance and other operating expenses (MOOE) while only P67 million was taken from the contingency funds.
“The difference was drawn from our regular MOOE. It’s allowed. It’s still within the allotment cast,” Vargas said.
Deputy presidential spokesman Gary Olivar also defended the Palace’s travel expenses.
“It is the ability provided within the GAA (General Appropriations Act) to cover expenditures on any given item in excess of the budget allocation by savings from other budget items and it should be within the appropriately authorized class,” Olivar said.
“For example, under the local or foreign travel which is an item under MOOE, the savings have to come from class of MOOE,” he explained.
Olivar also defended the use of the contingency fund for President Arroyo’s travel expenses, saying it is legal.
“When the congressman said that the entire contingency fund was exhausted because of the travels, he is wrong. The contingency fund can be used for other MOOE in excess of allocation as provided by the law. So he misspeaks,” Olivar said, referring to Guingona.
The controversy over the President’s travel expenditures came immediately after reports on her supposed lavish dinners in US restaurants with her entourage and friends. The controversy overshadowed reports on her meeting with US President Barack Obama.
Vargas noted that Mrs. Arroyo’s trip to the US cost the taxpayers a total of P19.19 million.
But Olivar emphasized that the overall benefits of the trips should also be taken into account.
“This is a mishmash of numbers. If we look at all the numbers together, we are looking at over $6 billion, a very rough estimate. That’s about 312,000 dinners at Le Cirque, assuming that the number is correct, which by the way, the restaurant management has denied,” Olivar said.
Guingona, meanwhile, challenged Speaker Prospero Nograles yesterday to lead an inquiry on allegations of overspending in Mrs. Arroyo’s foreign travels instead of making excuses for the controversy, which has sparked public uproar.
“I had expected that, as the leader of the House, Speaker Nograles would be the first in ensuring the proper use of the budget, especially so because the power over the purse is exclusively entrusted to Congress,” Guingona said.
“Instead, he is providing excuses for the abuse of budget,” he told reporters at a press briefing.
Guingona earlier said a Commission on Audit briefing last Aug.12 revealed that in 2008, the Office of the President spent P920 million from the contingency fund when the budget only allowed for P800 million.
“From previous hearings I already knew that the travel expenses of the Office of the President in excess of the budget was, in fact charged to the contingency fund,” Guingona said. – (taken from Philstar News Service, www.philstar.com, Marvin Sy With Perseus Echeminada)
For my opinion, it's very extravagant for one person to spend this huge amount of money in her trips. As I learned in our political science, political leaders must be the one who will serve the public. The public's welfare before thy self. So, why will PGMA spent that vast amount of money? I think that it's because of her entourage that will make the expenses bigger. Even if they said that not a single centavo was spent for the members of the Congress who accompanied her in the US, the point is, that's the tax of the people and they used it in their trips.
Even if they justified that her expenses in her trips are lesser than the money being generated by having many investors and all the aids that was given to us because of the people she convinced in her trips, i think it still doesn't matter. The question is not about if whether or not she convinced a thousand of investors, the question is on the process she convinces the investors, before or after her trips abroad. That "before" and "after" includes the way she spends the money.
Well, she will also benefit from the investors. Heard the word SOP? Standard Operating Procedure? There is a considerable percentage of amount that will be deducted at the money invested. It doesn't stop at the president. The congressman and even the barangay captains will have it's SOP "share".
Greed...
Deputy Executive Secretary for administration and finance Susana Vargas presented figures showing the overspending at a press briefing in Malacañang yesterday.
Vargas disclosed that P1.4 billion had been allocated for local and foreign trips of the Office of the President (OP) from 2001 to 2009 but the actual amount spent was close to P2.5 billion.
Vargas noted that on a yearly basis, the OP received P130 million for travel expenses until 2007, when the figure was raised to P170 million and then to P244.6 million each for 2008 and this year.
Malacañang’s disclosure came on the heels of an announcement by Bukidnon Rep. Teofisto Guingona III that the OP exceeded its travel budget by P1.3 billion from 2002 to 2008. Guingona said his figures were provided by the Commission on Audit (COA).
But Vargas explained that there was nothing irregular about the OP’s travel expenses and that it was allowed to draw from “savings” on other items in the miscellaneous and other operating expenditures provision in the OP’s budget.
She said that most of the additional funds needed for the travels were taken from the maintenance and other operating expenses (MOOE) while only P67 million was taken from the contingency funds.
“The difference was drawn from our regular MOOE. It’s allowed. It’s still within the allotment cast,” Vargas said.
Deputy presidential spokesman Gary Olivar also defended the Palace’s travel expenses.
“It is the ability provided within the GAA (General Appropriations Act) to cover expenditures on any given item in excess of the budget allocation by savings from other budget items and it should be within the appropriately authorized class,” Olivar said.
“For example, under the local or foreign travel which is an item under MOOE, the savings have to come from class of MOOE,” he explained.
Olivar also defended the use of the contingency fund for President Arroyo’s travel expenses, saying it is legal.
“When the congressman said that the entire contingency fund was exhausted because of the travels, he is wrong. The contingency fund can be used for other MOOE in excess of allocation as provided by the law. So he misspeaks,” Olivar said, referring to Guingona.
The controversy over the President’s travel expenditures came immediately after reports on her supposed lavish dinners in US restaurants with her entourage and friends. The controversy overshadowed reports on her meeting with US President Barack Obama.
Vargas noted that Mrs. Arroyo’s trip to the US cost the taxpayers a total of P19.19 million.
But Olivar emphasized that the overall benefits of the trips should also be taken into account.
“This is a mishmash of numbers. If we look at all the numbers together, we are looking at over $6 billion, a very rough estimate. That’s about 312,000 dinners at Le Cirque, assuming that the number is correct, which by the way, the restaurant management has denied,” Olivar said.
Guingona, meanwhile, challenged Speaker Prospero Nograles yesterday to lead an inquiry on allegations of overspending in Mrs. Arroyo’s foreign travels instead of making excuses for the controversy, which has sparked public uproar.
“I had expected that, as the leader of the House, Speaker Nograles would be the first in ensuring the proper use of the budget, especially so because the power over the purse is exclusively entrusted to Congress,” Guingona said.
“Instead, he is providing excuses for the abuse of budget,” he told reporters at a press briefing.
Guingona earlier said a Commission on Audit briefing last Aug.12 revealed that in 2008, the Office of the President spent P920 million from the contingency fund when the budget only allowed for P800 million.
“From previous hearings I already knew that the travel expenses of the Office of the President in excess of the budget was, in fact charged to the contingency fund,” Guingona said. – (taken from Philstar News Service, www.philstar.com, Marvin Sy With Perseus Echeminada)
For my opinion, it's very extravagant for one person to spend this huge amount of money in her trips. As I learned in our political science, political leaders must be the one who will serve the public. The public's welfare before thy self. So, why will PGMA spent that vast amount of money? I think that it's because of her entourage that will make the expenses bigger. Even if they said that not a single centavo was spent for the members of the Congress who accompanied her in the US, the point is, that's the tax of the people and they used it in their trips.
Even if they justified that her expenses in her trips are lesser than the money being generated by having many investors and all the aids that was given to us because of the people she convinced in her trips, i think it still doesn't matter. The question is not about if whether or not she convinced a thousand of investors, the question is on the process she convinces the investors, before or after her trips abroad. That "before" and "after" includes the way she spends the money.
Well, she will also benefit from the investors. Heard the word SOP? Standard Operating Procedure? There is a considerable percentage of amount that will be deducted at the money invested. It doesn't stop at the president. The congressman and even the barangay captains will have it's SOP "share".
Greed...
Comments
Post a Comment