House to hike DA budget

The Department of Agriculture (DA) may actually get a budget augmentation instead of a reduction despite the Commission on Audit’s findings of irregularities in its use of billions of taxpayers’ money in 2007.

Speaker Prospero Nograles said yesterday since the DA “will be one of the front line agencies in the country’s bid to cushion the effects of the US financial crisis, its proposed appropriation for 2009 should even be supplemented, if necessary.”

 “We should ensure easy and affordable access to food, particularly rice, which is our basic staple. We can survive any crisis as long as we have food on the table,” he said.

He corrected a previous statement lumping DA with the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) among what he described as “underperforming” agencies that should get a budgetary reduction.

Nograles said he is satisfied with the assurance of Agriculture Secretary Arthur Yap that his agency has substantially used its 2008 funds and that it would be capable of providing the nation with affordable and adequate food supply.

“I fully agree with Secretary Yap that since our main concern now is food security, we should strengthen the resources of the DA so that we can increase our country’s food productivity,” he said. He said while Yap might get a budget augmentation, the DPWH and the Department of Agrarian Reform would likely suffer a reduction, which would be realigned to basic social services.

DA’s budget for next year is about P40 billion, of which P17 billion would be for farm-to-market roads, irrigation canals, post-harvest facilities, seeds, and farm equipment, projects that members of the House and senators can access.

Recently, Malacanang released P2.6 billion to the agriculture department for farm-to-market roads (FMRs). Of that amount, P615 million was for congressmen, while an undetermined amount was for senators.

Yap has discretion over the bulk of FMR funds, which he can give to House members as augmentation and to governors and other local officials.

A separate amount was released for irrigation projects.

Critics have labeled FMRs as “farm to pocket” projects because corrupt lawmakers are said pocket at least 20 percent of their funds as commissions.

Government auditors who checked on the lawmakers’ FMR projects in 2007 could not find them as they had been washed away by rains because they were made only of gravel and earth.