Explanation of "No" Vote of Senator Risa Hontiveros Senate ratification of bicam report on 2025 GAB

PHILIPPINES, December 17 - Press Release
December 16, 2024

Explanation of "No" Vote of Senator Risa Hontiveros
Senate ratification of bicam report on 2025 GAB
December 16, 2024

Dear colleagues, please allow me to explain my "No" vote to the Bicameral Conference Committee Report on the disagreeing provisions of House Bill 10800 or the 2025 General Appropriations Bill.

I voted "Yes" to the Senate version of the 2025 national budget because I was confident that this budget would provide sufficient funding for our most critical and life-saving programs. However, the bicam version of the national budget is deeply concerning because it drastically reduces funding for essential sectors like public health and education.

One of the most alarming changes in the bicam version is the "zero state subsidy" in 2025 for PhilHealth. I understand that PhilHealth has been mismanaged, but eliminating the state subsidy entirely is not the solution. Instead of abandoning our responsibility to millions of indirect contributors - including poor families, senior citizens, persons with disabilities, and other vulnerable individuals - we should focus on replacing the incompetent management.

This move is blatantly inconsistent with current laws: the Universal Health Care Act explicitly mandates an annual premium subsidy for indirect contributors in the General Appropriations Act, and the Sin Tax Reform Act requires annual allocations to the National Health Insurance Program from sin tax revenues. These legal obligations cannot be disregarded simply because PhilHealth has excess or reserve funds.

Without the state subsidy, PhilHealth may operate at a net loss, which will undoubtedly affect benefit payments and compromise its capacity to provide financial protection and support to Filipinos in times of need. The Php600 billion in reserve funds is not an underspent amount and it is unavailable - it's a legally required reserve, particularly important considering the administration's plans to increase the value of benefit packages.

Ultimately, removing the government's contribution raises the question of who will bear the cost of indirect contributors' premiums. Will it fall on ordinary workers who already have their salaries deducted for PhilHealth each month? And, considering that the subsidy should come from sin tax revenues, where then should these revenues go?

Sadly, the budget cuts extend beyond PhilHealth. The Department of Health's budget was also slashed by Php37.59 billion in the bicam version. This raises a critical question: why are we defunding programs that directly save lives and improve the health of our citizens?

Similarly, the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps), which supports the poorest of the poor, faced a Php50 billion reduction after the bicam. This decision leaves us in the dark about who is responsible for these significant budget changes. This lack of transparency also extends to the removal of 41 well-planned foreign-assisted projects, which were inexplicably delisted, defunded, and placed in the unprogrammed category.

The bicam version also significantly reduces the budgets for education: the Department of Education lost Php15.17 billion, and the Commission on Higher Education lost Php11.77 billion. These cuts are particularly concerning in the midst of a learning crisis and raise another pressing question: why are we sacrificing education and the future of our students?

Even good governance measures were not spared. For instance, the bicam version rejected the Anti-Red Tape Authority's request to fund regional offices next year, a request that the Senate had previously granted.

It's incredibly ironic that while slashing funding for essential programs like health, social protection, and education, the bicam version simultaneously expands unprogrammed funds to Php531.6 billion, higher by 373B compared to the NEP. This raises serious questions about the purpose of these unprogrammed funds and their potential for misuse.

The bicam version of the 2025 General Appropriations Bill is crippled by misplaced priorities at the expense of our people's health and our children's education.

For these reasons, I cannot, in good conscience, vote to ratify this version of our national budget.