FY 2027 General Appropriations Bill Day 4 Part 2

Philippine Competition Commission (PCC): For FY2027, the National Expenditure Program (NEP) proposed budget for PCC was cited at approximately PHP 832 million, including funding for competition and capacity building. The FY2026 budget figure cited by the sponsor was PHP 587.6 million. The original agency-wide Department of Budget and Management (DBM) request total was not stated.

Metropolitan Baguio City, La Trinidad, Itogon, Sablan, Tuba and Tublay Development Authority (MBLISDA): The FY2027 budget was sponsored, but the hearing stated neither a numeric NEP total nor an original agency request to DBM.

Authority of the Freeport Area of Bataan (AFAB): The FY2027 proposed budget was presented, but no numeric NEP total or original agency request to DBM was stated.

Cagayan Economic Zone Authority (CEZA): The FY2027 budget was sponsored, but the hearing stated neither a numeric NEP total nor an original agency request to DBM.

Zamboanga City Special Economic Zone Authority (ZamboEcozone): The proposed FY2027 budget was sponsored, but no numeric NEP total or original agency request to DBM was stated.

Southern Philippines Development Authority (SPDA): The proposed FY2027 budget was sponsored, but the hearing stated neither a numeric NEP total nor an original agency request to DBM.

Governance Commission for Government-Owned or -Controlled Corporations (GCG): The proposed budget was sponsored, but the hearing stated neither a numeric FY2027 NEP total nor an original agency request to DBM.

Mindanao Development Authority (MinDA): The proposed FY2027 MinDA budget was PHP 272,435,000. The agency's original request total was not stated.

Marawi Compensation Board (MCB): Representative Antonio L. Tinio summarized the proposed FY2027 MCB budget as PHP 1.247 billion, including PHP 1 billion for the Marawi Siege Victims Compensation Fund. Separately, Representative Sarah Jane I. Elago said the FY2027 General Appropriations Bill (GAB) provided PHP 1 billion for the compensation program against a PHP 5.28 billion Board compensation proposal, and reported a PHP 4.015 billion funding gap. The stated gap does not reconcile arithmetically with the two figures. The Board proposal is a compensation-program proposal, not a stated original agency-wide DBM request; the original request total was not stated.

Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA): The FY2027 GAB listed one BCDA line item: PHP 1.983 billion for the Infrastructure Development Program. The hearing did not state an original agency request total.

Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA): The proposed FY2027 national subsidy for SBMA was PHP 500 million for ecozone infrastructure. Rep. Renee Louise M. Co also cited PHP 1 billion in unreleased FY2025 appropriations, which sponsor Rep. Bella Vanessa B. Suansing confirmed had not been released. Suansing agreed to provide Co a report on affected projects and requirements for proceeding. The agency's original request to DBM was not stated.

Department of Science and Technology (DOST): Representative Antonio L. Tinio cited the proposed FY2027 DOST total as PHP 6.868 trillion. In the following breakdown, he referred to the total as PHP 6.8 billion and listed PHP 4.687 billion under financial assistance and subsidy. The source does not reconcile the trillion-versus-billion discrepancy. No original agency request total to DBM was stated.

PCC budget and competition enforcement record: Rep. Dante S. Garcia, Vice Chair of the House Committee on Appropriations and sponsor for the Philippine Competition Commission (PCC), said the FY2027 request was calibrated to complex challenges. He said additional resources would strengthen surveillance, investigations, enforcement, analytics and interagency coordination.

Garcia said PCC referred initial findings of suspected bid-rigging in Bulacan flood-control projects to the Department of Justice (DOJ). He also described a dawn search with the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) at premises associated with SunWest Incorporated and Eco Leisure and Hospitality Holdings Company, where investigators suspected relevant records for an ongoing inquiry were located.

He said PCC fined the Boracay Business Administration of Scuba Shops and 40 member dive shops a total of 2.17 million for price-fixing on Boracay Island, Malay, Aklan, and ordered them to stop enforcing the multi-year agreement. The currency of the fine is not stated in this passage. Garcia also said PCC reviewed 21 mergers and acquisitions with an approximate transaction value of PHP 515.6 billion for competition concerns in FY2026 to date; this is transaction value, not a PCC budget amount.

Garcia described the PCC's work against anticompetitive agreements and abuses of dominant position, alongside merger review. Garcia said the PCC, Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT), and National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) finalized implementing rules for the Konektadong Pinoy Act to promote competition among data-transmission participants and internet service providers. He also described advocacy and capacity-building work, including pledges by four business organizations to uphold the Philippine Competition Act: the Philippine Chamber of Commerce, Philippine Retailers Association, Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Association of the Philippines, and Financial Executive Institute of the Philippines.

Rep. Presley C. De Jesus: PHILRECA Party-list Representative Presley C. De Jesus asked the Philippine Competition Commission (PCC) sponsor, Representative Dante S. Garcia, Vice Chair of the House Committee on Appropriations, whether the PCC had assessed the Green Energy Auction Program (GEAP) with the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC). Garcia said the PCC completed a study in 2025 and discussed its findings and policy options with the DOE and ERC in January and March 2026. He described potential concerns involving location-specific or per-grid auction design, consistency and transparency in setting Green Energy Auction Reserve (GEAR) prices, disclosure of auction information, and pre-bid conferences. The PCC assessed competition effects within the existing framework and recommended pro-competitive reforms to the agencies; the policy dialogue also considered possible application to future programs.

De Jesus asked whether the PCC had moved from monitoring fuel markets to a formal investigation or motu proprio inquiry into oil-company conduct during the period of fuel-price pressure. Garcia said the PCC was conducting a fuel study on asymmetric price adjustments and price dispersion, including whether prices rose quickly with international costs but fell slowly, or remained persistently above local prices. He said the study was still under way: the PCC had requested information from fuel companies and government agencies, some had responded, and the PCC was analyzing the data for possible anti-competitive conduct. Garcia said requested government data had arrived on September 18, 2026. He reported no completed findings from the study.

De Jesus cited the PCC market study on social media and search platforms, which he said found a highly concentrated Philippine digital-platform market and identified accumulated user data as a potential source of market power. Asked what the PCC would do beyond publication, Garcia said it had recommended giving data privacy greater weight in competition assessments, studying data portability and interoperability, coordinating more closely with privacy regulators, and considering legislative updates to the competition framework for data-driven markets.

De Jesus asked the sponsor to confirm that only 34% of the continuing appropriation for the foreign-assisted capacity-building project had been obligated. Garcia confirmed the figure and said the continuing appropriation was for a project released in 2023. He said the PCC requested a Special Allotment Release Order (SARO) for PHP 104 million, equivalent to loan proceeds downloaded by the Asian Development Bank (ADB), but the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) issued PHP 280 million instead, which he said resulted in excess resources.

De Jesus cited ADB project data as of June 23, 2026: cumulative contract awards were 45%, cumulative loan disbursements were 41%, and the loan had been extended to June 30, 2028. He distinguished these from Commission on Audit (COA) FY2024 utilization ratios and said the figures showed substantial project financing remained undisbursed. He asked for quarterly FY2027 obligation and disbursement targets and the activities that would use the funds. Garcia pointed to the loan extension, revised procurement and programming, additional project proposals, and stronger monitoring as measures intended to accelerate implementation, without providing quarterly targets or an itemized funding plan.

Asked how many active antitrust cases were pending or under review, Garcia said seven were ongoing. When De Jesus asked whether the cases could be disclosed, Garcia committed to submit the complete data to him for review. De Jesus closed by emphasizing the PCC's role in merger review and preventing collusion, particularly in fuel and energy markets.

Rep. Roberto Nazal: Rep. Roberto Nazal asked whether the Philippine Competition Commission (PCC) had studied a major retailer acting both as gatekeeper and as a competitor to suppliers in its stores. PCC sponsor Rep. Dante S. Garcia said yes. Nazal said private-label products were not inherently illegal, but asked when a retailer's control over shelf and counter placement, inventory and promotions, while selling a similar product, became predatory. Garcia said the PCC was monitoring the market and would investigate.

Asked about complaints and interventions, Garcia said the PCC had received minor complaints, given them attention and informed manufacturers. He said small businesses could complain through the PCC website and social media, including Facebook, and that filing was easy and would prompt an investigation.

Nazal described a retailer prominently displaying its own lower-priced product while making a supplier's competing product harder to access. Garcia identified the practice as self-preferencing and said the PCC could bring a case. When Nazal raised the risk that a powerful retailer might retaliate by removing a complainant from its shelves, Garcia said the PCC was mandated to act against even large companies and affirmed that it could protect smaller players.

Nazal asked whether the PCC had publicly studied how major retailers treat their own products versus competing suppliers across placement, inventory, promotions, sales data, pricing, fees and payment terms. Garcia said there was no public study, but the PCC had compelled a large retailer to be fair. Asked whether Congress should strengthen the PCC's authority, Garcia said a bill was pending in the economic-affairs committee, he thought, and the PCC was working with it; Nazal offered to co-author the bill.

Nazal then asked whether the PCC was examining online marketplaces that also sell or promote competing products, and what safeguards it considered necessary. Garcia said it was looking into the issue and monitoring the market, and that the PCC was bound to file a complaint if it found a violation.

Nazal said online platforms might charge up to 60%. As an example, he said that on a PHP 100 sale, a platform could take PHP 60, sometimes PHP 70, leaving PHP 30 before the seller's costs. He asked the PCC to examine these charges. Garcia said the PCC had studied digital platforms but not that specific issue and would now look into it.

Nazal asked whether a conglomerate's ownership of both a bank and financing-dependent businesses, such as real estate, could reinforce market power through preferential access to financing even when related-party lending complied with banking rules. Garcia said the PCC had studied cross-sector effects. He said it had not yet found such an unfair advantage in an industry, but would act if one emerged.

Nazal suggested using artificial intelligence (AI) to examine possible effects.

Nazal asked what sector reviews and enforcement milestones it would deliver, particularly for retail, digital platforms and concentrated markets. He asked whether the PCC would investigate proactively rather than wait for small businesses to complain. Garcia said the PCC actively monitored social media and would act promptly on complaints.

Nazal requested a spending plan, safeguards, sector studies, measurable outputs and a way for small businesses and suppliers to share market information safely. Garcia promised to provide a copy. Nazal closed by urging the PCC to develop proactive protections for small businesses.

Nazal then moved to terminate sponsorship and debate on the PCC budget. Rep. Arnan C. Panaligan joined for the majority; Deputy Speaker Ferjenel G. Biron, M.D. approved the joint motion and declared PCC interpellations terminated. This closed debate; it did not approve the appropriation.

MBLISDA sponsorship and immediate closure: Rep. Maria Angela S. Garcia, Vice Chair of the Committee on Appropriations and sponsor, said she was sponsoring the FY2027 budget of the Metropolitan Baguio City, La Trinidad, Itogon, Sablan, Tuba, and Tublay Development Authority (MBLISDA) on behalf of the committee. She appeared with Assistant Secretary Maria Monica C. Costales and the MBLISDA delegation, ready to answer questions.

Rep. Presley C. De Jesus was recognized but stated that no minority members wished to interpellate and moved to terminate sponsorship and debate without asking a substantive question. The Majority joined the motion, and Deputy Speaker Ferjenel G. Biron, M.D. heard no objection and declared interpellations terminated. The presentation and closure do not record approval of the appropriation.

AFAB FY2027 sponsorship, interpellation closure and CEZA take-up: Sponsor Rep. Maria Angela S. Garcia, Vice Chairperson of the Committee on Appropriations, presented the proposed FY2027 budget of the Authority of the Freeport Area of Bataan (AFAB), together with Administrator and Chief Executive Officer Muhammad Hussein P. Pangandaman. They were ready to answer questions.

Rep. Presley C. De Jesus moved to terminate sponsorship and debate without a substantive question. The majority joined, and Deputy Speaker Ferjenel G. Biron, M.D. declared interpellations terminated after hearing no objection.

CEZA sponsorship and immediate closure: Rep. Maria Angela S. Garcia, Vice Chair of the Committee on Appropriations and sponsor, said she was sponsoring the FY2027 budget of the Cagayan Economic Zone Authority (CEZA) on behalf of the committee. She appeared with Administrator and Chief Executive Officer Katrina Ponce-Enrile, Deputy Administrator for Support Services Perla C. Tumaliuan, and the CEZA delegation, ready to answer questions.

Rep. Presley C. De Jesus was recognized but stated that no minority members wished to interpellate and moved to terminate sponsorship and debate without asking a substantive question. The Majority joined the motion, and Deputy Speaker Ferjenel G. Biron, M.D. heard no objection and declared the interpellations terminated. This closure did not approve the appropriation.

ZamboEcozone sponsorship: Vice Chairperson Bella Vanessa B. Suansing of the Committee on Appropriations sponsored the proposed budget of the Zamboanga City Special Economic Zone Authority (ZamboEcozone) and said the Authority was ready to answer questions. No substantive question-and-answer exchange followed.

Rep. Presley C. De Jesus then moved to terminate sponsorship and debate. Rep. Rhea Mae A. Gullas joined for the majority, and Deputy Speaker Ferjenel G. Biron, M.D. approved the joint motion and declared interpellations terminated. This closed debate; it did not approve the appropriation.

SPDA FY2027 sponsorship and interpellation closure: Majority Leader Rep. Daphne A. Lagon moved to recognize Rep. Bella Vanessa B. Suansing, Vice Chairperson of the House Committee on Appropriations, to sponsor the proposed FY2027 budget of the Southern Philippines Development Authority (SPDA). Deputy Speaker Ferjenel G. Biron, M.D. recognized her. Suansing said she was ready to answer questions about the proposal; no substantive question-and-answer exchange followed.

PHILRECA Party-list Representative Presley C. De Jesus said no more minority members wished to interpellate and moved to terminate sponsorship and debate. Majority Leader Lagon said the majority joined the motion. Biron stated the joint motion, heard no objection, approved it and terminated the interpellations. The procedural closure records no appropriation approval.

GCG budget sponsorship: Rep. Bella Vanessa B. Suansing, Vice Chairperson of the Committee on Appropriations and sponsor of the Governance Commission for Government-Owned or -Controlled Corporations (GCG) budget, said she was ready to answer questions about the proposed budget.

Rep. Presley C. De Jesus: Rep. Presley C. De Jesus cited Department of Budget and Management (DBM) Corporate Budget Memorandum No. 48 for the FY2027 Corporate Budget Call. He also described a rule that a government-owned or -controlled corporation (GOCC) covered by Republic Act No. 10149 and receiving 60% or more of its funding from national government subsidies for 10 consecutive years is automatically flagged for mandatory institutional review by the Governance Commission for Government-Owned or -Controlled Corporations (GCG). Sponsor Rep. Bella Vanessa B. Suansing confirmed the rule. Asked how many GOCCs met the threshold, she said the study was ongoing, GCG was checking its records and would submit the qualifying list; she gave no count.

De Jesus asked whether reviews had begun and what timeline applied. Suansing described three monitoring tools: GOCC performance evaluations, director performance evaluations and corporate governance scorecards. She said finalization of FY2020 reports depended on Commission on Audit (COA) financial statements, so reviews remained ongoing, with completion expected later in the year. Asked how many directors were under review, she estimated about 500.

De Jesus requested information on 10 years of national government support, GOCC performance and scorecard results, and the status of GCG reviews. Suansing said GCG was checking the support figures and observed that government support had generally declined as some previously supported GOCCs improved their performance.

De Jesus cited GCG's June 30, 2026 classification of 21 GOCCs under abolition and the target of completing liquidation for at least five during 2026. Suansing confirmed that 21 were abolished and under liquidation and 11 had completed liquidation. She initially said 11 terminal reports were due to the Office of the President that year, then corrected herself: five GOCCs were in the 2026 terminal-report pipeline, leaving 16 under abolition. She said some cases dated back to 2013, roughly 13 years, because settling liabilities and compromise agreements took time. GCG had established a Disposition and Asset Management Office to expedite work on the 16 remaining GOCCs.

De Jesus asked for the annual personnel, administrative, liability, asset-maintenance and legal costs of keeping corporations in the process. Suansing said a GOCC recommended for abolition stopped receiving national government subsidy and that pending cases incurred no additional expense for the national government, but she gave no annual cost estimate.

Asked about employees, Suansing said those not absorbed by a government agency received separation incentive pay; employees needed to safeguard assets and process the abolition remained maintained by the corporation.

Asked why some GOCCs were being abolished, Suansing listed six grounds for recommendation: a function no longer relevant to state or national development; duplication or unnecessary overlap with other agencies; failure to produce desired outcomes or meet objectives; dormancy or non-operation; an activity considered better carried out by a private firm; or operations requiring consolidation under a holding company.

When De Jesus asked whether the private-sector criterion meant an entity would be sold or given away, Suansing clarified that GCG could recommend abolition, merger or privatization. For abolition, she said, operations, employees and assets were generally absorbed by a related government agency. This distinguished the private-sector criterion from the usual transfer of an abolished GOCC's functions and assets to a government agency.

De Jesus asked whether objective performance thresholds determined when a GOCC should be wound up. Suansing said GCG used the Corporate Governance Scorecard and Performance Evaluation Scorecard; consistent failure on key indicators could trigger review for abolition.

Asked whether poor performance had consequences for a GOCC board, Suansing said a director who scored below 85% on the director performance scorecard would not qualify for the shortlist for a succeeding term and could not be reappointed. De Jesus said he hoped GCG's commitments would produce measurable results to revisit in the next budget cycle and expressed support for the GCG budget.

Rep. Elijah Rumbaoa San Fernando: Rep. Elijah Rumbaoa San Fernando questioned Governance Commission for GOCCs (GCG) sponsor Rep. Bella Vanessa B. Suansing about the Compensation and Position Classification System (CPCS) and employee benefits. San Fernando said Republic Act 10149 created the GCG and CPCS, while its Section 11 protected incumbent employees against diminution of authorized salaries as of December 31, 2010. He argued that CPCS 1 and Executive Order 150 standardized compensation but also restricted collective negotiation agreements and payments outside CPCS absent presidential approval, affecting gratuities and other benefits. He said Executive Order 95, issued in 2025 as CPCS 2, repealed EO 150 but retained the negotiation ban and provident-fund rationalization.

San Fernando described CPCS 2 as converting prior allowances, benefits, and incentives into a one-time three-year present-value cash payout. Suansing described this as a transitory provision paid in three annual tranches, while monthly basic compensation also increased to bring pay closer to the private sector. San Fernando disputed that this addressed the loss or reduction of prior benefits.

San Fernando said workers at government-owned or controlled corporations (GOCCs) and government financial institutions (GFIs) had previously received varied allowances, benefits, and incentives, and argued that CPCS changes had removed or reduced some. He cited Social Security System (SSS) PRAISE incentives of PHP 434.805 million in 2024, which he said had been reviewed and approved by the Civil Service Commission in June 2024. He also said some provident funds with a 40% employer contribution had been reduced to 10% under CPCS 1 and CPCS 2.

As a separate example, San Fernando said Pag-IBIG had provided educational assistance since 1986 and cited a provident fund with a 45% employer contribution that he said had presidential approval in 1994. He also cited 2011 Philippine Deposit Insurance Corporation (PDIC) payrolls showing 14th-month pay and medical allowances.

San Fernando argued that the Social Security Act of 2018 (Republic Act 11199) was a later, more specific law than the general GOCC Governance Act (Republic Act 10149), and cited the SSS charter's authority to set reasonable employee compensation and benefits. He questioned whether GCG could rely on an executive order to override that authority. Suansing replied that the Social Security Law had not expressly repealed Section 11 of RA 10149, which she said therefore remained controlling; she added that GCG would submit to Congress if amendment were needed.

San Fernando also argued that a blanket bar on GOCC boards negotiating economic terms conflicted with workers' rights to organize and negotiate. Suansing acknowledged the right to self-organization but cited court rulings limiting negotiation of economic terms, including GSIS Family Bank Employees Union v. Villanueva and PNCC v. NLRC. San Fernando said he would review the cases and sought further dialogue to reconcile their readings.

San Fernando asked GCG to respect employees' vested rights and immediately approve reinstatement requests for provident funds while issues were resolved. Suansing did not commit to reinstatement. She said GCG was willing to present the data and assessments supporting its position and, with San Fernando's help, facilitate dialogue with labor groups from GFIs. She reaffirmed the commitment and said the GCG Chairperson had informed her of a meeting with labor groups the following Friday. San Fernando welcomed the dialogue and said workers sought clarity. The exchange ended with a motion to terminate sponsorship and debate; the Majority joined, and Deputy Speaker Janette L. Garin heard no objection and declared interpellation terminated.

MinDA FY2027 proposal and regional-development mandate: Rep. Nicanor M. Briones, Vice Chairperson of the House Committee on Appropriations and sponsor, described MinDA's mandate under Republic Act No. 9996 to promote and coordinate Mindanao's socioeconomic development through trade, tourism, investment, private enterprise and peace. He said MinDA serves as the permanent Philippine Coordinating Office for the Brunei Darussalam-Indonesia-Malaysia-Philippines East ASEAN Growth Area (BIMP-EAGA), and as secretariat for the Mindanao Power Monitoring Committee, Mindanao River Basin Management Council and the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC), as well as Cabinet Officer for Regional Development and Security in Mindanao. He also cited Project RIBER, which helps local government units develop, rehabilitate and maintain water-supply infrastructure. He linked the programs to the Mindanao Agenda's goals for inclusive recovery, green growth, resilience, peace and development.

Rep. Presley C. De Jesus: PHILRECA Party-list Representative Presley C. De Jesus asked MinDA sponsor Rep. Nicanor M. Briones whether reliable, affordable electricity was foundational to Mindanao's development. Briones agreed and said MinDA supported rehabilitating the Agus-Pulangi hydropower complex. He described the plant as having 1,000 megawatts of capacity while operating at 600 to 700 megawatts. De Jesus separately cited National Power Corporation (NPC) figures of 982 megawatts combined installed capacity and supply of more than 50% of Mindanao's electricity requirements. Both agreed that reliable and affordable renewable power was important to the region.

Asked whether MinDA favored privatizing Agus-Pulangi, Briones said MinDA wanted rehabilitation, not privatization, and that the Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management Corporation (PSALM), would implement privatization. Under follow-up, he characterized the private role as maintenance and rehabilitation only; when De Jesus restated that rehabilitation could be undertaken privately but the complex would not be sold, Briones affirmed that distinction. De Jesus cited his reading of Section 47F of the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA): the complex was excluded from the initial privatization of generation assets, would continue to be operated by the NPC, and any privatization was left to PSALM's discretion in consultation with Congress. Briones agreed with that description. De Jesus separately asked whether Congress had in fact been consulted; the exchange did not establish that it had.

Asked whether affected communities had participated in decision-making, Briones said consultations occurred through MinDA's membership on the Power Monitoring Committee and described annual Mindanao Power Summits involving stakeholders. He also said dialogue with the Department of Energy (DOE) on Agus-Pulangi was continuing. In response to questions about what local people wanted, Briones said they wanted rehabilitation and continued service, and answered affirmatively when De Jesus restated that this meant rehabilitation but not asset privatization.

De Jesus asked whether MinDA had submitted a written recommendation to the President, DOE, PSALM, NPC, Congress or another responsible body. Briones said yes. Asked whether the recommendation prioritized Mindanao residents' long-term welfare over short-term fiscal proceeds or private investor returns, he also answered yes. De Jesus nevertheless stated his and Rep. Sergio C. Dagooc's opposition to privatizing the complex and urged that it remain government-owned.

De Jesus moved to terminate sponsorship and debate, stating that no more minority members wished to interpellate. Majority Leader Rep. Arnan C. Panaligan joined the motion, and Deputy Speaker Ferjenel G. Biron, M.D. heard no objection and terminated the interpellations. This was a procedural closure, not an adoption of De Jesus's policy position or approval of an appropriation.

Marawi Compensation Board opening: Sponsor Rep. Nicanor M. Briones, Vice Chairperson of the Committee on Appropriations, presented the proposed FY2027 budget of the Marawi Compensation Board (MCB) and welcomed questions.

Rep. Dadah Kiram Ismula: Rep. Dadah Kiram Ismula asked for the Marawi Compensation Board (MCB)'s use of its budget for compensation versus operations. MCB sponsor Rep. Nicanor M. Briones said 95.6% of the 2025 total budget was for the program. For claim compensation, he gave a 64% obligation rate against released allotment; he then cited 42% disbursement and said this was 66% of obligations. These are different denominators.

Asked what the FY2027 NEP's 90% target for awarding and paying eligible claims meant in claimant numbers, Briones said it represented 684 claimants, leaving 3,600. He said the 2027 NEP budget was PHP 1 billion, while PHP 7.6 billion would be needed to compensate all claimants. The PHP 7.6 billion was the stated total need, not an adopted appropriation.

Ismula asked what would happen to unspent funds if the 90% target were missed. Briones said remaining budget could be used through a continuing appropriation in 2028, and said the 2027 budget was expected to be utilized in the first quarter. Ismula observed that even with a similar allocation in 2028, not all beneficiaries would be compensated; Briones agreed the NEP was insufficient without additional funding.

Asked about claim-processing benchmarks, Briones said MCB targeted 320 to 350 resolved claimants each month. He said progress reports went monthly to the Office of the President and the MCB board; weekly social-media posts gave docket numbers, ocular inspections let claimants track their place in the process, and an online docket let them request claim status by name, docket number or ID and receive a reply by email.

Ismula asked whether the FY2027 MCB budget included roads, transportation or other support for claimants relocated elsewhere. Briones said the budget was solely for Marawi Siege Victims compensation and confirmed there was no allocation for support services. Asked for a plan to make relocation dignified and sustainable, Briones said claim resolution would continue; the response in this source unit did not detail relocation services.

Ismula asked for MCB's timeline. Briones said its mandate ran through May 31, 2028. Asked what would happen to claims that could not be fully paid by then, he said continued adjudication depended on available funding and that after MCB's lifespan the compensation function would transfer to the Department of Human Settlements and Urban Development (DHSUD).

Ismula relayed claimants' concerns that thousands of property-damage claims transferred to the National Housing Authority (NHA) would require them to start over. Briones cited an MCB-NHA memorandum of agreement under Section 5 of Republic Act No. 11696 and said the process would not go back to zero. Ismula summarized that completed work would continue through NHA.

Asked how MCB ensured transparent processing without bureaucratic delay, Briones described a quasi-judicial sequence of filing, technical and legal review, clarification hearings when needed, Board deliberation and decision, posting, publication, award and payment. Structural claims required technical assessment, validation or ocular inspection, and legal review before being assigned to a division. Claims below PHP 10 million could be decided at division level instead of going en banc. Briones said reporting and monitoring data were available on the MCB website.

In closing, Ismula said nine years had passed since the siege and urged a higher MCB budget so victims could receive compensation. This was a request for increased funding; no appropriation increase was adopted in the exchange.

Rep. Renee Louise M. Co: Rep. Renee Louise M. Co asked about the agreement transferring compensation cases from the Marawi Compensation Board (MCB) to the National Housing Authority (NHA). Sponsor Rep. Nicanor M. Briones cited Sections 4 and 5 of the compensation law. He distinguished the Department of Human Settlements and Urban Development (DHSUD)'s continuation of MCB functions under the sunset clause from the NHA agreement, and promised Co a copy of that memorandum.

Co asked whether the NHA had a fiscal year 2027 budget line for compensation of transferred cases and said there was none. She said she would manifest that the Committee on Appropriations amend the NHA budget under the General Appropriations Act to fund the cases. The exchange records this as a requested amendment, without an amount or disposition.

Co asked about schools affected by the siege and their repair status. Briones said there were 10 four-storey school buildings with capacity for 9,000 to 10,000 students and, according to the NHA, they would open the following month. He confirmed they were still under construction and said students meanwhile used a temporary school provided by the local government unit (LGU). Briones agreed to provide Co a list showing which schools were repaired, still planned for repair, and their status.

Co cited a report that 3,100 housing-related claims were being transferred to the NHA and asked how records would be protected and validated during the transition. Briones said the MCB and NHA had signed terms of reference to ensure orderly file transfer; he confirmed that lists would not be lost and necessary validation would be done.

When Co asked how permanent-housing turnover would be accelerated, Briones said settlement was the NHA's responsibility while the MCB handled compensation. Co sought dialogue with internally displaced persons and affected sectors; Briones said the MCB was willing to meet with claimants, and Co asked that the NHA also be kept informed.

Rep. Sarah Jane I. Elago: Representative Sarah Jane I. Elago cited a Marawi Compensation Board (MCB) report stating that, as of August 31, 2026, the Board had PHP 4.362 billion in total appropriations, of which PHP 2.362 billion had been released as allotments, with PHP 2 billion pending further release from the Department of Budget and Management (DBM). Asked why the pending amount had not been released, Representative Nicanor M. Briones said DBM had not released it and was still reviewing it.

Elago said the MCB began operations on January 30, 2023, under Republic Act No. 11696, and that its five-year mandate was set to end June 3, 2028. Briones said the Board could complete adjudication before the mandate ended but could not disburse because allocated funds were insufficient. He said the Department of Human Settlements and Urban Development (DHSUD) would continue processing compensation claims under the law after the Board's term.

Elago separately asked how Executive Order No. 78, signed November 28, 2024, affected the MCB's role as secretariat and attached agency of the Office of the Presidential Advisor for Marawi Rehabilitation and Development for policy and program coordination. Asked whether that attachment would also end with the MCB's statutory life, Briones said it appeared that it would. The exchange distinguishes DHSUD's continuation of claim processing from the MCB's attachment and coordination role.

Asked whether the Board's mandate should be extended until remaining claims were paid, Briones said an extension would be preferable but would likely require legislation; he said he knew of bills in Congress and the Senate to extend the Board's life.

Elago cited 5,945 pending claims as of August 2026 and emphasized the need for adequate, certain funding and transparent disbursement directly to claimants before the mandate ended.

Elago called on Congress to hold a hearing on a possible extension of the MCB's mandate, citing the need to complete compensation and reparation for internally displaced persons from the 2017 Marawi siege. No extension or increase was adopted in this exchange.

Rep. Antonio L. Tinio: Rep. Antonio L. Tinio noted that Republic Act No. 11696 sets a sunset: after five years from the effectivity of the implementing rules, the MCB becomes functus officio, and the Department of Human Settlements and Urban Development (DHSUD) continues the Board's powers, including processing and disbursing pending compensation to qualified claimants. Tinio said the approaching end of the mandate should spur the Board to finish its work rather than leave a backlog. The sponsor, Rep. Nicanor M. Briones, confirmed Tinio's date that the mandate ends after May 31, 2028.

Asked how much was still needed to complete compensation before the mandate ended, Briones said all claims required PHP 6.6 billion on top of the PHP 1 billion allocation. Tinio summarized this as PHP 7.6 billion needed for 2027, with only PHP 1 billion allocated; this was the stated total claims need, not an adopted appropriation increase. Briones first said 4,360 claimants, then later gave 4,300 as the total. He said the current fund could pay 760 claimants and that this group could be paid within one to two months. Asked whether the MCB could award more with added funding, Briones said it could and that funding was the constraint.

Tinio asked for a realistic FY2027 annual target. Briones estimated 3,500 claimants a year and said that would require PHP 5 billion total; Tinio framed the gap from the PHP 1 billion allocation as PHP 4 billion additional, which Briones confirmed. Tinio then cited a separate MCB declaration that it could award compensation to 3,600 families with an additional PHP 4 billion, and Briones agreed. Asked whether MCB had conveyed its request to the Committee on Appropriations, Briones said it appeared to have sent a letter. Tinio supported an institutional amendment for the additional amount and said the Board should be held to its stated capacity. This was support for a request, not adoption of a budget amendment.

Tinio said youth from Marawi had traveled to Manila to seek direct dialogue and clear information about long-delayed claim awards. He placed on record the MCB's commitment to lead a dialogue in Marawi during the first week of October, and Briones confirmed it. Tinio reiterated his support for the funding request and looked forward to the Board meeting claimants in Marawi. Tinio then moved to terminate debate on the MCB budget; the majority joined, and Deputy Speaker Janette L. Garin declared the period of debate and interpellation terminated. The motion closed debate and did not adopt the requested appropriation amendment.

Bases Conversion and Development Authority opening: Sponsor Rep. Maria Angela S. Garcia, Vice Chairperson of the Committee on Appropriations, presented the proposed FY2027 budget of the Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA). Together with President and Chief Executive Officer Joshua Bingcang and BCDA officials, she was ready to answer questions.

Rep. Dadah Kiram Ismula: Rep. Dadah Kiram Ismula asked for performance targets under the Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA) Infrastructure Development Program in the proposed FY2027 budget. Sponsor Rep. Maria Angela S. Garcia cited 1,500 jobs, 100% completion of Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) facilities, and 100% implementation of infrastructure projects as planned, including roads and facilities.

Asked how many countries would join the Clark Advanced Manufacturing Park (CAMP) under Pax Silica, Garcia said the initiative was not exclusive to the United States and that the Pax Silica Declaration had 24 signatories as of June 2026. She said nothing was final and did not give a final number of countries or firms expected to locate in CAMP. Garcia described BCDA's role as an investment-promotion agency and commercial partner or lessor for CAMP. The agency had 257 staff overall but no staff dedicated to CAMP because no concrete project or role had yet been established.

Ismula questioned why BCDA had launched the project and notified local governments and residents while the arrangement remained unsettled. Garcia said only initial discussions had taken place and final agreements would depend on further feedback.

Ismula asked how BCDA would ensure that companies in CAMP complied with Philippine labor laws and whether BCDA could penalize noncompliant firms. Garcia said Philippine labor laws would apply, but there was no agreement yet; she did not identify a penalty provision or explain BCDA's enforcement authority. On workers' right to unionize, Garcia again said the labor laws would apply. Ismula cited the DHL workers' strike and contract terminations following unionization as a concern and pressed for enforceable written protections.

Asked whether Filipinos would make up the majority of high-quality jobs, Garcia cited a Board of Investments (BOI) requirement of at least 90% Filipino workers. Ismula said she expected that assurance to appear in the written agreement, which Garcia had said was not yet in place.

Ismula, who said she is Indigenous, asked whether Indigenous Peoples and communities would be affected by the project. Garcia said the Clark Freeport and Special Economic Zone covered 35,300 hectares and CAMP 1,620 hectares, with nearly 15,000 hectares set aside for ancestral domains. She said no Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT) or Certificate of Ancestral Land Title (CALT) had yet been recognized for CAMP at the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) level. After Ismula pressed on Indigenous communities without ancestral-domain titles, Garcia acknowledged some Indigenous and non-Indigenous families in the CAMP area, which she then described as 1,600 hectares. The two CAMP figures are separately stated in the exchange.

Garcia said BCDA would coordinate with NCIP and local government to learn affected families' views, consider assistance, include them in development and social planning, and provide alternatives. Ismula urged BCDA to meet Indigenous and non-Indigenous residents on the ground rather than rely on written notices, and asked for documented agreements and protections before the project was rushed. She said unresolved community concerns should be addressed before agreements proceed.

Rep. Renee Louise M. Co: Rep. Renee Louise M. Co asked about the Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA) letter dated April 9, 2026, proposing land for a Pax Silica coordination office in the Luzon Economic Corridor. Co described an offer of about 4,000 acres under a lease-free arrangement with a two-year grace period. She noted that the Philippines signed the Pax Silica Declaration on April 16; sponsor Rep. Maria Angela S. Garcia confirmed it was a nonbinding statement of shared principles. Garcia described the letter as a preliminary proposal under BCDA's investment-promotion mandate and cited the BCDA law and Investors Lease Act as its basis.

Garcia said the Department of Justice (DOJ) cleared the proposal and the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) endorsed it the day before the April 9 letter. She said the Department of Economy, Planning, and Development (DepDev) was not consulted because the proposal was preliminary; she identified the Board of Investments (BOI) as also involved. Garcia promised a report listing participating agencies and heads, dates, inputs, and endorsements. Co's account places the declaration signing after the letter, while Garcia described the proposal as arising from the declaration; the exchange does not reconcile that sequence.

Co asked whether the Department of Agriculture or Department of Agrarian Reform had been consulted, saying the proposed site included active farmland. Garcia described it as public land in the Clark Freeport and Special Economic Zone with an industrial master plan and said the subject area was not classified as agricultural. Co cited residents' and farmers' reports of a one-month eviction notice and lack of consultation, farmers' claim that they had been offered PHP 30 per square meter for their land, and reports that farmers were being urged to vacate or stop planting. She relayed preliminary estimates that 15,200 farmers might lose agricultural land and that about 20,000 Aeta residents could face long-term displacement.

Garcia asked for copies to review, said there were currently no 20,000 displaced farmers or Aeta residents, and maintained that the site was not agricultural. She said 10,700 hectares of Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) farmland had been segregated from the broader 35,300-hectare area. Co clarified that the larger displacement figures were estimates and public statements, then reiterated that Aeta families said they had lived and farmed there for generations and identified burial grounds and livelihood at risk.

Co asked whether the Aeta community had given free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) before the offer and argued that reported ancestral claims and due diligence should be addressed before commitments proceeded. Garcia said there was no ancestral domain, Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT), or Certificate of Ancestral Land Title (CALT) in the subject area; she said no FPIC was obtained because there was no CADT and the proposal was preliminary. Co disputed that the absence of a certificate resolved the claims, cited reported occupation and ancestral evidence, and asked that project processing pause until the issues were settled. Garcia did not agree to halt the proposal; she maintained that the land was titled to BCDA and designated as a freeport and special economic zone, and denied threats to farmers' lives. Co said farmers' concerns about home and livelihood were being answered by references to the land's legal designation.

Co invoked the Special Economic Zone Act (Republic Act 7916) and asked BCDA for measurable evidence that registered firms had transferred technology, modernized industry, upgraded domestic suppliers, or increased Filipino-owned manufacturing capacity. Garcia said BCDA did not yet have the requested data but would submit it; Co said she would await the report and asked for evidence of the law's results over three decades.

Co also asked which framework would govern the Pax Silica coordination office, noting that the proposal letter cited RA 7916 while she said the BCDA president had publicly referred to the BCDA law and CREATE MORE. Garcia answered that the legal basis was the BCDA law and CREATE MORE, which she described as an update of RA 7916. Co requested reports and said BCDA should provide evidence that existing eco-zone incentives produced domestic supply chains, import substitution, and measurable technology transfer before expecting similar tools to drive national industrialization through Pax Silica.

Rep. Sarah Jane I. Elago: Rep. Sarah Jane I. Elago asked whether the 10,724 hectares excluded from the Clark Special Economic Zone under Presidential Proclamation No. 163 had been transferred to the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), when transfer occurred, and whether a deed existed. Rep. Maria Angela S. Garcia said the area was outside the Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA) jurisdiction and offered to inquire with DAR about the status of the tenure documents; she did not give a transfer date or confirm a deed.

Elago noted that DAR personnel were also asking about the deed and requested a report on the land's history and any prior discussions.

Elago said the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) had confirmed that no project-specific environmental impact assessment (EIA) had been applied for or processed for the proposed Pax Silica project and that no clear project description had been submitted to the Environmental Management Bureau. The existing environmental compliance certificate (ECC), she said, covered BCDA's Master Development Plan. Garcia agreed that the ECC was for the master plan and said there were no final agreements or final projects yet to submit to DENR.

Elago asked for a copy of that ECC.

Elago said Indigenous people and farmers in Capas, Tarlac had petitioned to stop Pax Silica-related efforts and had collected 400,000 verified signatures. She cited the local government's statement that more than 30% of the land was productive agricultural land and asked whether BCDA had applied for a land-conversion order. Garcia said the project area was titled to BCDA as a special economic zone, so conversion was not required.

When Elago raised the local government's farmland statement, Garcia suggested there might be a discrepancy and said BCDA should check it. Elago maintained that the local government's account should not be set aside and called for protecting agricultural land.

Elago asked whether BCDA had appropriated land for Pax Silica. Garcia said BCDA owned the Clark zone land and did not need to expropriate it. Elago then questioned whether foreign investors' possible leases of up to 99 years would give them effective control even if the government retained title. Garcia answered that locators and investors would remain subject to Philippine law and would not own the land.

Elago said her party had opposed the 99-year Foreign Investors Lease Act and contrasted it with the prior maximum she cited of 50 years, extendable by 25. She argued that a lease lasting longer than many people's lifetimes still raises control and land-use concerns.

Elago cited BCDA's estimate that the project could need 65 to 90 million liters of water daily and a planned supply capacity of 135 million liters daily. She asked whether Bangot River had fishers and noted that a study had so far examined Bangot, while other named rivers remained unstudied in the account. Garcia said she had no information about the river's fishers.

Elago cited a reported 2023 release of 24,000 common carp and 46,000 tilapia fingerlings into Bangot River for Indigenous fisherfolk.

Elago asked who the initial solar-farm investors were and where the facilities would be located. Garcia said solar farms and a possible liquefied natural gas (LNG) power plant were planned within the special economic zone; she said the solar farm was underway and might be completed within two years, but did not identify investors.

Elago raised concerns that solar expansion could displace farmland; Garcia said the current project was in a different area, and Elago cited a proposed geofencing program involving the Department of Agriculture (DA), DAR and Department of Energy (DOE). Garcia also described planned modern agriculture farms inside the zone.

Elago relayed community accounts that Indigenous families lived in the area before BCDA arrived in 1992 and described concerns about displacement, loss of ancestral burial grounds, livelihood and home.

She also cited earlier National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) testimony that free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) had not yet been obtained amid questions about ancestral-domain certification. She described approximately 1,620 hectares as set aside for Pax Silica and argued that development should include affected Indigenous communities and farmers rather than sacrifice their land and the environment.

Elago argued that Philippine science and technology could support national development and proposed doubling the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) budget rather than allowing development to serve foreign-power interests while Indigenous and farming communities risk losing land and livelihoods. This was her funding proposal; no appropriation action or adoption occurred in this exchange.

Rep. Antonio L. Tinio: Rep. Antonio L. Tinio asked which Clark area was under discussion. Sponsor Rep. Maria Angela S. Garcia distinguished the 4,400-hectare Clark Freeport Zone, where Clark International Airport is located, from Clark Advanced Manufacturing Park (CAMP), inside the Special Economic Zone in New Clark City, Tarlac. Garcia described the Pax Silica declaration as involving a broader global chain of manufacturing, logistics, roads, and the airport, but said the specific BCDA proposal was in New Clark City. Tinio cited U.S. statements describing 4,000 acres; Garcia gave the local area as 1,620 hectares. The exchange also left open how the coordination-office proposal related to the manufacturing park.

Tinio asked about a reported BCDA-Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) partnership to position the Port of Subic Bay as a maritime gateway for Pax Silica. Garcia confirmed there was a memorandum of understanding (MOU) and promised to provide a copy for the House and public.

Tinio cited U.S. public releases describing an "Economic Security Zone" and joint governance, including reports of a U.S. demand for diplomatic immunity. Garcia said BCDA could not confirm the U.S. statements and that she knew of no Philippine law establishing an Economic Security Zone. Garcia confirmed that the reported bilateral governance framework had not been signed, was still being studied, and was not yet available for release; Tinio sought a copy for public disclosure once signed.

Tinio read the BCDA letter proposing a Pax Silica Coordination Office in an area described as approximately 4,000 acres and questioned how that office related to the later description of CAMP. Garcia said the proposal was preliminary and would be discussed; she did not identify an amended proposal. Tinio quoted the U.S. response as accepting a proposed two-year rent-free lease subject to agreement on precise boundaries and a formal lease. Garcia described a lease-like arrangement with lease payments, while Tinio said the accepted proposal itself was not a lease agreement. The rate after the rent-free period and the full lease term remained undetermined; Garcia identified 99 years as the legal maximum, not an agreed term.

Tinio read the Special Economic Zone Act's immigration provisions, including permanent resident status for an investor with an initial investment of at least US$150,000 and eligible family members; Garcia confirmed the investment threshold when asked.

Tinio read a BCDA letter inviting Barangay Santa Lucia residents to discuss processes and possible government assistance for the New Clark City master development plan; he said residents understood it as relocation assistance. Garcia said the letters went to residential addresses outside New Clark City, while some people inside the city could be affected by master-plan development. She distinguished that letter from the 1,600-hectare CAMP area, which she said it did not identify. Tinio pressed for the barangays covered by the specific project. Garcia eventually identified Aranguren and O'Donnell; she also acknowledged that residents inside New Clark City could be affected by development.

Tinio said residents he visited in September included Aeta communities and asked whether free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) had been obtained. Garcia said the area was not ancestral domain and that, in BCDA's view, FPIC was not required; she said BCDA was coordinating with the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP). Tinio said the Aeta Hungay had a pending ancestral-domain application, originally filed in 1999 after an initial spoken reference to 1991, and refiled in 2021, which he said NCIP had confirmed, and argued that consultation was still needed while the application remained pending. The speakers' positions on the land and consent requirements remained in disagreement.

Tinio moved to suspend deliberations on the proposed BCDA budget so the House could consider the remaining scheduled agencies. Majority Leader Rep. Antonino B. Roman III said the Majority joined the Minority in the motion. Deputy Speaker Janette L. Garin put the joint motion, heard no objection, approved it, and declared consideration of the BCDA budget suspended.

SBMA sponsorship and interpellator recognition: Deputy Speaker Janette L. Garin recognized Rep. Bella Vanessa B. Suansing to sponsor the proposed FY2027 budget of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA), then recognized Rep. Renee Louise M. Co as interpellator.

Rep. Renee Louise M. Co: Representative Renee Louise M. Co cited 234 containers of suspected electronic waste from the United States that she said entered Subic since March 2025, and another 184 containers that she said nearly arrived between August and September 2026, without prior informed consent required by the Basel Convention. Co described the Convention's e-waste amendment and asserted that its rules restricted the trade, including imports from the United States, which she characterized as a non-party. She said the Department of Foreign Affairs had confirmed that no bilateral agreement authorized imports from the United States. Co also cited Basel Action Network (BAN) field investigations that she said classified the containers as hazardous electronic waste and e-waste requiring special consideration.

SBMA sponsor Rep. Bella Vanessa B. Suansing said the agency classified the imported materials as nonhazardous scrap mixed metals, computer accessories, used meters and electronics, and scrap copper, and said they complied with environmental rules and international treaties. Suansing offered supporting documents. When pressed for the legal basis, she repeated that the materials were not hazardous and said SBMA inspected them; she identified SBMA as inspector and affirmed that the Bureau of Customs (BOC) and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) were involved. Co said the floor response had provided no counter-legal basis beyond the inspection assurance and asked for a written explanation of SBMA's earlier call for Subic to become a Basel Convention Free Zone. Suansing said locators wanted to expand operations to include United States imports, and that the United States' non-party status was the basis for SBMA's statement. Co said that was insufficient justification for an exception.

Co asked how much SBMA received from recyclable-waste activity and how much private recyclers earned. Suansing said SBMA data showed recycler payments of PHP 205,864,939 for 2025. Co requested a written report distinguishing private recycling-facility profits from the amount going to SBMA; those details were not provided in this exchange.

Co asked for the July 1 joint-inspection report on recycling locators in Subic. Suansing agreed to provide it. Asked for the number of operating facilities, she said there were 14 active locators out of 18 total and promised to submit the list.

Co asked about the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA) and SBMA, which she said described the Port of Subic as a maritime gateway for Pax Silica. Suansing said the MOU was nonbinding and limited to use of the port for the proposed project's maritime-logistics requirements. Co requested a copy of the MOU; no sponsor response to that request is recorded in this unit.

Rep. Antonio L. Tinio: Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) sponsor Rep. Bella Vanessa B. Suansing cited 1,783 locators and 174,930 people employed through SBMA, along with PHP 610 billion in total investment acquired by the authority. She said PHP 12.15 billion in dividends had been given to the national government since 1999. These are distinct measures: investment and cumulative dividends, not annual amounts.

Representative Antonio L. Tinio asked about port throughput. Suansing described SBMA as covering 67,000 hectares with 15 operational piers and wharves. Tinio cited roughly 600,000 twenty-foot equivalent units (TEU) as the latest 2024 throughput figure; Suansing described 600,000 TEU as the port's total capacity. The exchange did not reconcile actual throughput with capacity.

Asked about SBMA's contribution to gross domestic product, Suansing instead described an overall contribution to the national economy, comprising Bureau of Customs collections, taxes paid to the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), dividends to the national government, and the local government unit share. She then cited PHP 53.1 billion for 2025 and said SBMA had provided over PHP 50 billion per year since 2022. The sponsor did not identify these figures as GDP, and the 2025 figure is distinct from the recurring annual claim.

Tinio asked whether an agreement between the Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA) and SBMA designated Subic port as an entry and exit point under Pax Silica. Suansing confirmed the memorandum of understanding (MOU), describing Subic only as a gateway for maritime-logistics requirements. She confirmed that Subic is not an Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) site.

Tinio argued that Subic nevertheless had substantial military-linked activity and cited open-source examples. Suansing confirmed that Subic Drydock Corporation repairs and overhauls United States Navy vessels, and that some fuel at the terminal is used by the U.S. Navy, while clarifying that the supply is nonexclusive. She also confirmed a U.S. Marine Corps warehouse and a destroyer visit Tinio raised. Tinio further claimed that the Philippine National Oil Company (PNOC) placed diesel it had bought at the site; this was his claim in the exchange. The examples and Tinio's broader characterization of the military presence remain attributed to the speakers.

Tinio warned that Subic's civilian and military-linked facilities could be exposed in a conflict, citing international examples and presenting a possible U.S.-China conflict as a scenario. He asked how the facilities could be protected and what the economic consequences would be if they were damaged. Suansing said SBMA has no drone defenses or anti-missile defenses; she said the Philippine Navy has such capabilities and that SBMA coordinates with it. She described SBMA's role as economic and revenue-focused, with security and defense a national-government responsibility, and deferred defense strategy to the Department of National Defense (DND). She also described coordination with law-enforcement and intelligence agencies against smuggling, drugs and espionage. Suansing said damage to the facilities would reduce SBMA income and that restoration costs would need to be quantified.

Tinio asserted that PNOC bought PHP 20 billion worth of diesel during the energy crisis and placed a large share at Subic. The sponsor confirmed that the Strategic Oil or Fuel Reserve was at the site, but the purchase amount remained Tinio's statement.

Tinio concluded by opposing Pax Silica, ended his interpellation and moved to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the SBMA proposed budget. Majority Leader Rep. Arnan C. Panaligan joined the motion; Deputy Speaker Janette L. Garin stated the joint motion, heard no objection, and terminated the interpellation. This closed questioning and did not approve the appropriation.

Department of Science and Technology opening: Rep. Amben S. Amante confirmed his readiness to sponsor the proposed FY2027 budget of the Department of Science and Technology (DOST), including its attached agencies, and to answer Rep. Antonio L. Tinio's questions. Deputy Speaker Janette L. Garin directed the technician to play Tinio's presentation slides.

Rep. Antonio L. Tinio: Rep. Antonio L. Tinio estimated from the chart that over 80% fell under assistance/subsidy and questioned why this category lacked special provisions setting parameters; he noted the provisions mentioned a priority research program and reporting/posting requirements. DOST sponsor Rep. Amben S. Amante explained that these were grants and aid for programs including research and development, CEST, SETUP, and smart and sustainable communities. Tinio requested a grants-and-aid breakdown for 2026 and proposed 2027, and Amante agreed to provide it.

Asked about DOST's artificial intelligence (AI) sovereignty work and its budget, Amante said DOST had allocated PHP 200 million in FY2026 and confirmed PHP 345 million for FY2027. Tinio described the latter as investment in domestic AI capacity. Later, when Tinio asked again how much DOST was seeking, Amante answered 300 million. Tinio repeated that amount, began a different year/amount recap, then corrected himself to 300. This later recap was not clearly matched to the earlier confirmed FY2027 figure, so the amounts remain distinct.

Amante described research-data, cloud-computing and high-performance-computing facilities, including a Metro Manila AI data center. He listed 33% average operational utilization, 38 storage servers, 22 compute servers and 10 GPU servers, plus 24 H200 GPUs, 1,248 CPU cores, 11,264 GB RAM and 1,574 TB storage. Tinio confirmed the capacity was located in the Philippines and asked for a written return to review the technical details.

Amante said DOST used open-source and local large language models. Asked which ones, he answered "Opus." Tinio challenged that identification, saying he understood Opus/Claude to be proprietary, and asked DOST to send technical details to his office rather than resolve the question on the floor. Amante offered to provide details; the model identity remained uncertain.

Tinio asked whether DOST was directly involved in Pax Silica; Amante said it was not. Tinio linked the initiative to advanced AI manufacturing and critical-mineral supply chains and framed U.S.-China competition over AI chips and rare-earth minerals as context. He cited a speech by Jacob Helberg, whom he described as a leading architect of Pax Silica, criticizing domestic AI stacks as duplicative and economically unsustainable. Tinio rejected reliance on foreign providers as a substitute for domestic capability and supported DOST's local AI work.

Tinio asked what government agencies spent on AI subscriptions from U.S. providers; Amante said DOST did not have that information. Tinio then asserted that hundreds of billions were allocated to AI subscriptions, primarily to U.S. providers. Amante had not confirmed government-wide spending, and Tinio's statement did not specify currency.

Tinio moved to terminate interpellation and debate on the proposed DOST budget, including attached agencies. The majority joined and Deputy Speaker Janette L. Garin declared the interpellation terminated. The next motion suspended consideration of House Bill No. 10858; consideration was suspended, not passage.