By Benjamin Cuaresma
MANILA — A simmering controversy over the Senate’s investigation into alleged irregularities in government flood control projects has resurfaced after Senator Erwin Tulfo disclosed that fellow lawmakers had urged him not to sign a committee report, prompting Senate President Pro Tempore Panfilo Lacson to declare that the revelation confirmed his long-held suspicions about why the document never reached the Senate floor.
Lacson, who previously chaired the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, said Tulfo’s statements shed light on the circumstances that prevented the panel’s partial report from advancing despite months of hearings into billions of pesos worth of flood mitigation projects.
In a social media post on Saturday, Lacson thanked Tulfo for what he described as an honest account of events that led to the report’s demise.
The veteran lawmaker said he had always suspected that factors beyond the report’s contents were responsible for its failure to gain sufficient support among senators.
Tulfo’s remarks came during an interview with veteran broadcaster Jessica Soho, where he revealed that some colleagues discouraged him from affixing his signature to the report. According to Tulfo, concerns were raised because individuals who could potentially be affected by the committee’s findings were allegedly among those within the institution itself.
Despite the pressure, Tulfo said he could not ignore what had emerged during the investigation and decided to sign the report in his capacity as vice chairman of the Blue Ribbon Committee.
In a separate radio interview, Tulfo disclosed that some senators questioned his loyalty to the chamber’s collective position, with remarks suggesting that he was not acting as a “team player” and was behaving as though he was “not one of us.”
The senator maintained that disagreement over portions of the report should not have prevented it from proceeding to plenary deliberations. He argued that senators who disagreed with specific findings could have introduced amendments or voiced objections during debates on the Senate floor instead of blocking the report’s progress altogether.
The committee report focused on alleged anomalies in the implementation of flood control projects across the country, a subject that has drawn increasing public scrutiny following repeated flooding incidents and concerns over the effectiveness of government-funded mitigation programs.
Although the report failed to secure the support necessary for formal sponsorship before the full Senate, Lacson noted that its findings were nonetheless incorporated into official Senate records and transmitted to the Office of the Ombudsman for further investigation.
Since the report was shelved, leadership of the Blue Ribbon Committee has changed several times. The chairmanship moved from Lacson to Senator Pia Cayetano and later to Tulfo following shifts in the Senate’s leadership structure.
The issue has gained renewed attention amid broader political tensions within the upper chamber. During separate proceedings conducted by the bloc led by Senator Alan Peter Cayetano, individuals claiming to have served as intermediaries in alleged kickback operations involving flood control projects accused Tulfo and former Senate President Vicente Sotto III of receiving cash payoffs.
Both lawmakers have categorically denied the accusations.
To avoid any perception of conflict of interest, Tulfo announced that he intends to inhibit himself from future Blue Ribbon Committee proceedings involving the flood control investigation. Instead, he plans to propose the creation of a special subcommittee that could continue the inquiry under the leadership of Senator Francis “Kiko” Pangilinan, subject to Senate approval once regular sessions resume.
The developments have once again placed the Senate under public scrutiny, raising questions about whether political alliances and institutional interests hindered efforts to pursue accountability in one of the government’s largest infrastructure spending programs.
As lawmakers prepare to return to session, the controversy threatens to reignite debate over transparency, oversight, and the Senate’s willingness to confront allegations that may implicate members of its own ranks.
ia/xf
