People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
Senate President Pro Tempore Panfilo “Ping” M. Lacson stressed this on Sunday as he flagged P2.5 billion in allocables tied to Sen. Maria Imelda Josefa Remedios “Imee” Marcos in the 2025 National Expenditure Program (NEP), as well as her silence on supposed “giniling” or “pork” when the 2026 budget bill was being tackled at the bicameral conference level.
Lacson said these are based on documents he received from the camp of the late Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Undersecretary Catalina Cabral.
“Marcos had allocables worth P2.5 billion in the NEP according to the Cabral files. Most allocables were moved from the NEP to the 2025 GAA via insertions in the bicam where Sen. Marcos had at least the same amount based on DPWH records… While part of the insertions were flagged for later release, part of her FLR allocables had been released,” he said in English and Filipino, in an interview on DZBB radio.
“She makes a lot of noise criticizing the 2026 budget for having ‘pork’ but she had ‘pork’ in the budget, at least in the 2025 GAA. So she has no moral ascendancy to criticize. In the first place, she was a member of the Senate contingent in the bicameral conference committee. Why didn’t she raise the issue that there was pork? We heard nothing from her then, when she was in the bicam,” he added.
In Filipino: Lacson, Sinita ang P2.5B ‘Allocables’ ni Imee sa 2025 NEP; Kinuwestiyon ang Katahimikan sa Bicam
Also, Lacson noted that while Sen. Marcos rejected the ratified version of the 2026 budget bill due to increases in funding for assistance programs she labeled as soft pork – among them the Medical Assistance to Indigent and Financially Incapacitated Patients (MAIFIP) and Assistance to Individuals in Crisis Situations (AICS) – she had pork at least in the 2025 GAA, and was even physically present in the distribution of ayudas last year.
“She was so fond of attending such distributions, and now she says there is ‘pork giniling’ in the budget? You know, if you don’t have any moral ascendancy, just keep quiet because it will come back to you. People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones,” he said.
Lacson scored Marcos as well for her baseless criticisms of the Blue Ribbon Committee which he chairs – particularly in its investigation into the flood control scandal.
He debunked her claims that he banned members from linking personalities such as former Speaker Martin Romualdez to the issue, noting that in the first place, she never attended hearings that he chaired.
Also, he addressed Sen. Marcos’ claims of him “limiting” senators to 10 minutes in asking questions, saying this was needed so each senator can have his/her turn to ask questions.
“In the first place, what pressure is she talking about when she never attended any of the hearings I chaired?” he said.
“I have said before that the best response to nonsense is silence. But when she starts insulting, I cannot disregard it anymore. By insulting the Blue Ribbon Committee, she is undermining its integrity. Why does she not attend and ask questions?” he added.
When asked what could be behind Sen. Marcos’ actions, Lacson said: “She might want to apply as the Senate’s ‘meow-meow.’ We don’t want that but it seems someone is intent on applying for the post.”
Lacson said he remains puzzled over why some senators including Marcos and Sen. Rodante Marcoleta seem intent on disrupting the Blue Ribbon hearings, with Marcoleta earlier questioning Lacson’s objectivity.
“The problem is that there are those who want to disrupt the investigation. I don’t know what their end game is,” he said.
Meanwhile, Lacson declined to speculate on claims that the “pork” in the budget would be dangled before House members for the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte.
“Under the Constitution, the House has the power to impeach, and the Senate has the power to convict or acquit. So since we could be senator-judges in a potential impeachment case, we cannot comment especially on the merits of the case,” he said.
*****
Lacson, Sinita ang P2.5B ‘Allocables’ ni Imee sa 2025 NEP; Kinuwestiyon ang Katahimikan sa Bicam
Pag nasa glass house ka, huwag kang mambato.
Binigyang-diin ito ni Senate President Pro Tempore Panfilo “Ping” M. Lacson nitong Linggo matapos niyang ituro ang P2.5 bilyong halaga ng allocables na inuugnay kay Sen. Maria Imelda Josefa Remedios “Imee” Marcos sa 2025 National Expenditure Program (NEP), gayundin ang pananahimik nito ukol sa sinasabing “giniling” o “pork” habang tinatalakay ang 2026 budget bill sa bicameral conference committee.
Ani Lacson, ito ay base sa mga dokumentong kanyang natanggap mula sa kampo ng yumaong Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Undersecretary na si Catalina Cabral.
“Meron siyang allocable doon na P2.5 billion sa NEP sa Cabral files. Meron din siyang napasama kasi burado ang allocables sa NEP pero pagdating sa insertion, paglabas sa bicam at ito ang na-enrolled bill, ang iba na-FLR. Pero si Sen. Imee, meron din doon… At ang FLR niya may na-release doon,” aniya sa panayam sa DZBB radio.
“Siya ang nag-iingay na tahasang kini-criticize niya ano ang budget ng 2026, ang napirmahan, sinabi niya may tadtad ng pork, may giniling, may tinadtad pero pork pa rin. Kung ganyan ang definition niya ng pork, siya ang may pork. So wala siyang moral ascendancy para i-criticize. Unang una, member siya ng bicam. Bakit di siya nag-raise ng issue, nang nasa bicam siya, tadtad ng pork ito? Wala tayong narinig sa kanya pero nandoon siya sa bicam,” dagdag niya.
Binanggit din ni Lacson na habang nagreklamo si Marcos sa ratipikadong bersyon ng 2026 budget bill dahil sa pagtaas ng pondo para sa mga assistance program na tinawag niyang soft pork — kabilang ang Medical Assistance to Indigent and Financially Incapacitated Patients (MAIFIP) at Assistance to Individuals in Crisis Situations (AICS) — ay may pork naman siya sa 2025 GAA, at personal na dumalo sa pagbigay ng ayuda noong nakaraang taon.
“Siya nga ang hilig mag-attend doon tapos sasabihin niyang may tinadtad may giniling na pork? Alam mo, pag wala kang moral ascendancy wag ka nang magsalita wag kang pumuna kasi babalik sa iyo yun. May sinasabing pag nasa glass house ka wag kang mambato,” aniya.
Tinuligsa rin ni Lacson si Marcos sa umano’y walang basehang mga batikos nito sa Blue Ribbon Committee na kanyang pinamumunuan — lalo na sa imbestigasyon nito hinggil sa flood control scandal.
Pinabulaanan niya ang pahayag ni Marcos na pinagbawalan umano niya ang mga miyembro na iugnay ang ilang personalidad gaya ni dating Speaker Martin Romualdez sa isyu, at iginiit na hindi naman ito dumalo sa mga pagdinig na kanyang pinangunahan.
Tinugon din niya ang paratang ni Marcos na “nililimitahan” niya sa 10 minuto ang pagtatanong ng mga senador, na aniya’y kinakailangan upang mabigyan ng pagkakataon ang bawat senador na makapagtanong.
“Unang una paano niyang masasabing pinagbawalan, hindi naman siya nag-a-attend ng hearing?” ani Lacson.
“Meron akong nasabi ko na ito, the best response to nonsense is silence. Pero pagka nagiinsulto na, hindi mo na rin pwedeng i-disregard. Iniinsulto niya ang Blue Ribbon Committee, ina-undermine niya ang integridad ng committee na member din naman siya doon. Bakit di siya mag-attend at tanungin niya?” dagdag niya.
Nang tinanong kung ano kaya ang dahilan sa mga kilos ni Sen. Marcos, tugon ni Lacson: “Baka gusto niyang mag-apply na ‘meow-meow‘ ng Senado… Ayaw naming magkaroon ng ‘meow-meow’ sa Senate pero parang may gustong mag-apply.”
Naguguluhan pa rin si Lacson kung bakit tila determinado ang ilan, kabilang si Marcos at Sen. Rodante Marcoleta, na gambalain ang mga pagdinig ng Blue Ribbon Committee, matapos kuwestiyunin ni Marcoleta ang pagiging obhetibo ni Lacson.
“Ang problema may ganyang mga kasamang nanggugulo talaga. Di ko alam ano ang kanilang end game,” aniya.
Samantala, tumanggi si Lacson na magbigay ng espekulasyon hinggil sa mga pahayag na maaaring ialok ang “pork” sa budget sa mga miyembro ng Kamara kapalit ng impeachment laban kay Vice President Sara Duterte.
“Under the Constitution sila talaga ang may power mag-impeach. Ang Senado may power mag-convict or acquit. So dahil potentially magkaroon ng impeachment case at ito ay ma-transmit sa Senado mahirap kaming mag-comment lalo sa merit ng kaso kasi kami magiging huwes,” aniya.
*****