MANILA — Senate President Pro Tempore Panfilo “Ping” Lacson flagged P2.5 billion in allocables allegedly linked to Sen. Maria Imelda Josefa Remedios “Imee” Marcos in the 2025 National Expenditure Program (NEP), while questioning her silence on alleged “giniling” or pork during the bicameral conference deliberations on the 2026 budget bill.

Lacson said the information was 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,” Lacson said in English and Filipino in an interview on DZBB radio.

He said Marcos has no moral ascendancy to criticize alleged pork in the 2026 budget, noting that she had allocables in the 2025 General Appropriations Act (GAA).

“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 said.

Lacson also noted that while Marcos rejected the ratified version of the 2026 budget bill due to increases in funding for assistance programs she labeled as soft pork — including the Medical Assistance to Indigent and Financially Incapacitated Patients (MAIFIP) and Assistance to Individuals in Crisis Situations (AICS) — she allegedly had pork in the 2025 GAA and was physically present in the distribution of aid 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 also criticized Marcos for what he described as baseless attacks against the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, which he chairs, particularly over its investigation into the alleged flood control scandal.

He denied her claim that he barred members from linking personalities such as former Speaker Martin Romualdez to the issue, saying Marcos never attended hearings he chaired.

“In the first place, what pressure is she talking about when she never attended any of the hearings I chaired?” he said.

He also addressed her claim that he limited senators to 10 minutes for questioning, saying the time limit was necessary to give each senator a chance to ask questions.

“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 said.

When asked what could be behind 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 was puzzled by what he described as attempts by some senators, including Marcos and Sen. Rodante Marcoleta, to disrupt the Blue Ribbon hearings, noting that Marcoleta earlier questioned his 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.

Lacson declined to comment on claims that pork allocations in the budget could be used to influence House members in 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.