How Zaldy Co’s ₱100-Billion Budget Insertion Claims Could Shape the Marcos Administration — and What It Means for the Country

The political landscape in the Philippines was rocked recently when former Ako Bicol Representative Zaldy Co released a video statement claiming that around ₱100 billion in budget insertions for the proposed 2025 national budget were allegedly made upon the instruction of President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. and House Speaker Martin Romualdez.

The allegation is explosive — not just because of the staggering amount involved, but also because it touches on some of the country’s most sensitive issues: corruption, public infrastructure, and government transparency.

As expected, Malacañang firmly denied the accusations, calling the claims “baseless” and challenging Co to testify under oath. The Senate, meanwhile, signaled readiness to investigate, though experts note that unsworn statements carry limited legal weight. Still, this is a situation that can snowball politically — especially with the public already sensitive to flood-control scandals and questionable infrastructure spending.

So the big questions now are: What does Co’s statement mean for President Marcos? How will this affect national governance? And what might the ripple look like here in Northern Mindanao, especially in cities like Cagayan de Oro?

Let’s break it down.

The Core of Co’s Allegation

Co claims that approximately ₱100 billion worth of projects — mostly under the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) — were inserted into the 2025 national budget at the direction of the President and the House Speaker.

According to his documents, the massive amount includes:

• ₱81.08 billion for DPWH projects
• Flood-control and riverbank protection works
• Road and drainage systems
• Revetment and slope protection structures
• Various national roads, bridges, access roads, and flyover-type projects
• Additional allocations to agencies like the Philippine Coconut Authority, National Electrification Administration, National Housing Authority, DICT, and even ₱5.4 billion allegedly placed under the Office of the President’s “unprogrammed funds.”

These are the types of projects that normally require multi-year planning and strict evaluation. Co’s key allegation is that these were politically ordered — not agency-initiated — which, if true, would raise concerns about transparency and prioritization.

How This Impacts President Marcos

Even without formal charges, a scandal of this size is politically damaging.

1. Increased scrutiny and political pressure

Whether or not evidence surfaces, Marcos will face stiff questions on his administration’s spending priorities. Any perception that public funds were allocated based on political motives — not strategic national planning — can weaken public trust.

2. Potential investigations

Senate committees, COA, and the Ombudsman may be compelled to examine the details. Pressure from watchdog groups and independent media will likely intensify.

3. A hit to the administration’s image

Marcos often pushes infrastructure and modernization as key pillars of his leadership. Allegations affecting DPWH — especially involving flood-control projects — undercut that message. It doesn’t help that the country has ongoing investigations into substandard flood-control works and alleged procurement anomalies.

4. Internal fallout

If the issue gains traction, we may see Cabinet officials, DPWH regional heads, or even House allies coming under fire. There’s also a risk that political factions within the administration shift positions or distance themselves.

What This Means for the Philippines

Nationally, the implications can be serious.

1. Public frustration could rise

The Filipino public is sensitive to issues involving corruption, especially when tied to infrastructure. People feel the effects directly — flooding, damaged roads, ghost projects, or overpriced contracts.

2. Economic ripple

If certain projects are found to be improperly inserted or mismanaged, timelines for essential infrastructure may be delayed. That affects transport, agriculture, disaster resilience, and even investor confidence.

3. Push for reforms

Scandals like this often reignite calls for:

• Open budget data systems
• Project transparency portals
• Independent construction audits
• Stronger procurement laws

If handled well, the controversy could lead to systemic reform. If handled poorly, it reinforces the status quo.

4. Political tensions ahead of the next elections

This controversy arrives at a sensitive political moment. It may become a major narrative heading into the next national elections, especially if opposition groups leverage it as proof of mismanagement.

Northern Mindanao and Cagayan de Oro: What to Watch

Although Co’s publicized list doesn’t specify all regions affected, many of the projects he described are the same types commonly implemented in Northern Mindanao, such as:

• Riverbank protection (common along Cagayan de Oro River)
• Slope protection structures in Bukidnon
• Flood-mitigation systems in Iligan
• Coastal roads and revetments in Misamis Oriental
• Access roads leading to tourism sites

These are high-budget projects with major impact on local communities.

Here’s what this could mean locally:

1. Funding shifts or delays

If audits or investigations freeze budget allocations, some infrastructure works in the region could slow down. CDO and Misamis Oriental often rely on national funding for major flood-control improvements.

2. Closer scrutiny on DPWH regional offices

Expect more eyes on bidding, contractors, and implementation. Local journalists and watchdogs may start tracking whether local projects match the “profiles” Co mentioned.

3. Possible exposure of ghost or substandard projects

Mindanao is no stranger to stalled or poorly executed public works. This controversy may empower communities to ask tougher questions about ongoing barangay-level and city-level projects.

4. Opportunities for transparency

Local officials who champion open, well-documented infrastructure spending may gain more public support. Cities like Cagayan de Oro — which heavily depend on good drainage and flood-control systems — benefit a lot from clean governance.

Why this matters to ordinary Filipinos

Whether you live in CDO, Manila, Bohol, or Davao — infrastructure is a basic public service you feel every day.

If money meant for flood-control is diverted, we all pay for it later through:

• Worse flooding
• Road closures
• Higher disaster risk
• Damage to businesses
• More taxpayers’ money needed for future repairs

Budget scandals don’t just exist on paper — they shape the daily lives of Filipinos.

The Bottom Line

Zaldy Co’s statement may be unsworn, but it has already made waves. The Marcos administration now faces a major challenge: proving transparency and integrity in government spending.

Whether the allegations turn out true or false, they highlight a deeper truth — Filipinos deserve infrastructure projects that are well-planned, corruption-free, and focused on real community needs.

For Northern Mindanao, this is an opportunity to push for more transparency in flood-control works, major roads, tourism infrastructure, and coastal protection. And for cities like Cagayan de Oro, it’s a reminder that honest governance is not just a political slogan — it’s a necessity for public safety and regional growth.