Heated Debate Erupts Over Proposed Supplemental Budget
CEBU CITY – The usually calm sessions of the Cebu provincial board took a sharp turn on May 26 as members engaged in a heated debate over the proposed P1.2-billion supplemental budget. The disagreement stemmed from allegations raised by one board member during media interviews, which stirred emotions among the lawmakers.
Board member Celestino “Tining” Martinez III stood up to defend the board’s integrity and professionalism amid growing public scrutiny of the proposed supplemental budget for fiscal year 2025. Martinez emphasized the importance of unity during the transition to the incoming administration.
“Mr. Chair, I find it disheartening that at a time when we should be united to ensure a smooth transition for the incoming administration, this court is being questioned and doubts are being cast upon our proceedings – and ultimately, against this institution,” Martinez said. He stressed that his remarks represented not only his opinion but that of the entire legislative body.
Concerns Over Allegations and Budget Intentions
Martinez criticized Cebu’s third district board member Ismael John Borgonia for making what he called unfair and premature statements. The controversy revolves around the proposed P1.2-billion supplemental budget, which Borgonia publicly opposed, questioning the timing and purpose of the allocation.
“The pending passage of Supplemental Budget No. 1 for fiscal year 2025 has become a hot topic in both mainstream and social media – fueled by public statements made by one of our colleagues,” Martinez noted. He accused Borgonia of casting malicious doubts on the board’s intentions, especially after a special session failed due to a lack of quorum.
Borgonia, who had withdrawn his reelection bid days before the recent elections, openly challenged Governor Gwendolyn Garcia’s move to allocate additional funds, labeling it suspicious. Critics described the proposal as a “midnight deal,” prompting an opposing group to rally outside the legislative building just hours before the session.
Martinez clarified that the supplemental budget was still a draft subject to review, amendments, and proper legislative debate. He explained it was intended to support both current and incoming provincial board members, including representatives from the newly established lone district of Mandaue City. To facilitate thorough discussion, Martinez moved to refer several items to their respective committees.
Board Members Defend Professionalism Amid Tensions
Borgonia withdrew his resolution opposing the budget’s discussion, citing its absence from the day’s official agenda. “I do not know what is the intention of my colleagues, maybe that is to get back at me, whatever. Well, I will be the recipient of the punching bag, Mr. Chair,” he said.
The situation escalated when board members Tata Corominas, Glenn Soco, and Martinez defended the right of members to express their opinions freely. Corominas criticized Borgonia’s approach, saying it undermined the collective decision-making process.
“This is a show of how low the opinion of the gentleman from the third district has of his colleagues. We are all professionals here, and we are all here to do our job. To say that the budget will pass because (of the) majority; it’s a numbers game… he is taking away our individual stand and opinion on the matter,” Corominas stated.
Soco supported Corominas’ position by requesting that parts of Borgonia’s statements be removed from the official records. “I move that those statements issued by Board Member Borgonia be stricken off from the records,” Soco said. The motion was seconded and approved without objections.
Borgonia Clarifies His Position
Borgonia defended his earlier remarks, insisting he did not intend to divide the board. He explained that since the supplemental budget was not on that day’s agenda, discussing it was pointless. He also asserted his right to withdraw his resolution opposing the budget at any time.
“Considering that there is no supplemental budget for approval in today’s agenda, Mr. Chair, this does not serve any purpose. So, considering that, Mr. Chair, there’s no point in discussing this. As the author, it is also my right to withdraw at any time a certain resolution which does not serve any purpose,” Borgonia said. “The main purpose of this resolution was, of course, to stop the supplemental budget from passing,” he added.
Further Review and Calls for Unity
Reports indicate that the Committee on Budget and Appropriations returned the proposed Supplemental Annual Investment Program No. 1 to the Governor’s office on May 23 for additional review and assessment.
Corominas reiterated her concerns about Borgonia’s methods, pointing out that his public statements preempted the board’s collective decision. She urged for ethical conduct and proper communication among board members.
“I think the point of contention for many of us here is that what the gentleman from the third district did during the special session and today is to preempt the intention of the provincial board. He has been doing his rounds of interviews but has failed to convey his misgivings to us, his colleagues. And since he is talking about ethics here, the most prudent and ethical thing to do would have been to wait for the supplemental budget to be calendared and exhaust all his objections during the deliberation of the said budget,” she said.
The controversy highlights the challenges faced by the Cebu provincial board as it navigates budget approvals amid political tensions and public scrutiny.
For more news and updates on proposed supplemental budget, visit Filipinokami.com.