The 2025 national budget and the AKAP

While the 2025 national budget has finally become law after President Ferdinand Marcos signed it on Rizal Day, it can still be challenged before the Supreme Court for its constitutionality. The Constitution clearly states that the government should give priority to education and the health of its people.

The budget for education, despite being presented as the “highest budget” to align with the national requirements, remains highly questionable and could be challenged before the Supreme Court. The signed budget also suggests that the DPWH is no longer the agency with the highest budget, as many have noticed it.

Among the budget items likely to raise public concern are the still-zero allocation for PhilHealth, the AFP Modernization program, the significant budget for the Office of the President, the Senate, the House of representatives, the Ayuda sa Kapos ang Kita Program (AKAP), the DPWH, and others.

One of the budget items that raises many questions among ordinary people is the AKAP program, which has a budget of ?26 billion. Of this amount, ?21 billion is reportedly earmarked for the House of Representatives, and ?5 billion is allocated for the Senate. The program is designed to provide financial assistance to individuals who belong to the low-income category. Qualified individuals will receive cash amounts ranging from ?3,000 to ?10,000, subject to the assessment of the DSWD.

In fairness to the president and Congress, they may have sincere intentions of helping people through this program. However, because it involves public funds, it is inevitable that taxpayers will have questions about its effectiveness, especially considering reports that politicians may be involved in identifying its beneficiaries.

People are questioning the need for this new program, as there is already an existing initiative to help the poorest of the poor, the 4P’s program. At least the guidelines for this program are clear, and the beneficiaries will “graduate” from it when their children become professionals and secure employment.

For AKAP program, many have questions as to how it will be fairly implemented. Who will qualify as the beneficiaries? How should the “kapos ang kita” be properly evaluated? If politicians indeed have a hand in the distribution, could it be used as a tool for vote-buying?

Some suggest that, to avoid the perception of vote-buying in an election year, the AKAP program should be implemented after the election. The president has not yet responded to this suggestion, but many members of Congress would likely react negatively if the president were to consider it.

The program has been perceived by some as a form of dole out, which is not sustainable. Why not use the ?26 billion for programs that will benefit more people? Or the funds could be used to train beneficiaries, equipping them with additional skills and knowledge to help them earn a living. The focus should be something sustainable so they do not have to rely on dole outs.

A popular quote says “Do not give them fish, but teach them how to catch fish,” serving as a reminder of the importance of fostering self-reliance and sustainability.