FIVE THINGS TO KNOW…

Short explainers published throughout the day.

1:18 PM7-minute read

ABOUT THE NEW SWS POVERTY NUMBERS

Self-rated poverty and food poverty declined in June, but the figures also show how many Filipino families remain under pressure and why lower household budgets do not necessarily mean life became cheaper.

Read the explainer →
2:02 PM11-minute read

ABOUT THE CHILDREN'S SOCIAL MEDIA SAFETY ACT

House Bill No. 9965 would bar children below 13 from having social media accounts, require parental consent for users aged 13 to 17, regulate platform algorithms, and impose fines reaching P50 million. It is still being deliberated in the House.

Read the explainer →
12:02 PM7-minute read

ABOUT THE SEALED BIR BOX

Marcos authorized the BIR to comply with the Senate subpoena. That did not open the records to the public or prove the unexplained-wealth allegation.

Read the explainer →

MCT READER PULSE · MCT-PULSE-2026-007

MCT READER SURVEY

House prosecutors are considering whether to stop presenting evidence on the bribery article against Vice President Sara Duterte and move directly to the unexplained-wealth charge. Do you agree with that strategy?Pinag-iisipan ng mga prosekutor ng Kamara kung ititigil ang paghaharap ng ebidensiya sa artikulo tungkol sa panunuhol at tututok sa kasong hindi maipaliwanag na yaman laban kay Bise Presidente Sara Duterte. Sang-ayon ka ba sa estratehiyang ito?

Some prosecutors want to move directly to the unexplained-wealth charge; others want to proceed with all four articles. No final decision had been announced when this survey opened. The question is about prosecution strategy, not guilt.

Background: The Philippine Star and Daily Tribune.

This is an informal survey of verified MCT readers who choose to participate. It is not nationally representative.

Open the shareable survey page →
View previous survey results →
Checking your reader session…

July 30, 2026 · 2:39 PM7-minute read

FIVE THINGS TO KNOW ABOUT THE FIGHT OVER THE FLOOD-CONTROL HEARINGS

Tulfo says the minority is blocking the probe, but the documented delay was the committee’s unfinished formal organization.

Senate Blue Ribbon Committee chair Erwin Tulfo says the minority bloc is trying to stop the flood-control investigation from resuming.

He did not name the senators who supposedly asked him to drop the hearings. He said the reason was ‘obvious’ based on the people Sen. Panfilo Lacson has recently accused.

The dispute points to Senate Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano. Lacson has accused Cayetano of involvement in questionable infrastructure projects in Taguig, where Cayetano’s wife, Lani, is mayor.

Cayetano denies involvement in any anomaly. He says no ghost projects have been found in Taguig and has challenged Lacson to present proof.

The committee has another problem that has nothing to do with those accusations. Tulfo said it could not resume hearings until its membership was formally declared on the Senate floor.

This leaves the probe caught between a procedural delay and a political fight. Only one of those has been clearly documented.

Here are five things to know.

1

TULFO CONTROLS THE AGENDA, BUT HE CANNOT HOLD A HEARING ALONE

The Blue Ribbon Committee investigates possible wrongdoing involving government officials and agencies. Its hearings are conducted in aid of legislation, which means the stated purpose should be to examine laws, spending rules, or government systems that Congress may need to change.

As chair, Tulfo has wide control over the direction of the inquiry. He can propose hearing dates, identify new leads, invite witnesses, request records, and decide which areas the committee should examine first.

A valid hearing still requires a properly formed committee operating under Senate rules. Tulfo said on July 28 that the membership had not yet been formally declared on the Senate floor.

That is a real procedural obstacle. A chairman’s announcement that he wants a hearing does not replace the formal organization of the committee.

WHAT TO WATCH

Watch for the official committee membership, the hearing date, and the witness list. Those documents will show that the inquiry is actually moving again, rather than remaining at the level of interviews and public statements.

2

THE CLAIM THAT THE MINORITY IS BLOCKING THE PROBE HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN

Tulfo said people from the minority had asked the majority not to continue the investigation. He did not identify them or release a letter, motion, message, or other record showing how they tried to stop it.

He linked the supposed attempt to the growing feud between Lacson and Cayetano. Lacson has been gathering information about Taguig projects, while Cayetano has accused him of making malicious claims.

That political background may explain Tulfo’s suspicion. It does not prove that the minority formally blocked a hearing.

A senator may object to the scope of an inquiry, question its witnesses, refuse to join a committee report, or argue that a hearing is politically driven. Those actions are different from preventing the committee from meeting.

WHAT TO WATCH

Tulfo should identify who asked him to stop and explain what those senators actually did. Readers should also watch for any formal objection from the minority concerning the hearing date, witnesses, subpoenas, or scope of the inquiry.

3

THE PREVIOUS COMMITTEE REPORT FAILED TO GET ENOUGH SIGNATURES

The earlier Blue Ribbon investigation produced a partial committee report under Lacson. It recommended further investigation or legal action involving former House speaker Martin Romualdez, former Ako Bicol representative Zaldy Co, Sens. Francis Escudero, Jinggoy Estrada and Joel Villanueva, and other officials.

The report needed nine signatures before it could be formally taken up in the Senate plenary. It received seven.

Tulfo later said some senators had pressured him not to sign because their colleagues could be affected. He signed with proposed changes and complained that the draft had left out other names mentioned during the hearings.

Lacson eventually delivered the findings through a privilege speech and sent the report to the Office of the Ombudsman. That allowed investigators outside the Senate to study the records even though the report had not cleared the Senate process.

The stalled report shows why committee membership and signatures are important. A chair may write findings, but enough committee members must support the report before the full Senate can formally act on it.

WHAT TO WATCH

The new committee must decide how much of the previous investigation it will adopt and what still needs to be checked. Watch for a new or expanded report, the names of its signatories, and any changes to the earlier recommendations.

4

THE TAGUIG ACCUSATIONS ARE NOW AT THE CENTER OF THE FIGHT

Lacson says his team prepared five case studies involving infrastructure projects in Taguig and submitted evidence to the Ombudsman. His allegations include possible double billing and collection, unfinished projects, and billions of pesos in budget insertions.

Those allegations have not been established as fact.

Cayetano says there are no ghost projects in Taguig and has welcomed an investigation at the proper venue. He has also asked why Taguig is being singled out and called for a wider review of projects in other Metro Manila cities.

The Department of Public Works and Highways said it was checking the Taguig accusations. Cayetano responded that earlier reviews had already found no ghost projects and questioned why another inspection was needed.

The Senate hearing could help settle part of the dispute, but only if it presents project records rather than another round of personal attacks.

WHAT TO WATCH

Look for project identification numbers, contracts, inspection reports, completion records, payment documents, and the results of the latest Public Works review. Those records can show if a project existed, how much was paid, who handled it, and if the work matched the contract.

5

A SENATE HEARING AND AN OMBUDSMAN INVESTIGATION CAN CONTINUE AT THE SAME TIME

Senate rules say a pending criminal or administrative case does not automatically stop an inquiry that serves a legislative purpose.

The two investigations have different jobs. The Senate can expose weaknesses in the budget and contracting process, question officials, request records, and recommend new laws.

The Ombudsman investigates possible criminal and administrative offenses. It decides if the evidence supports the filing of a case before the proper court.

A Senate committee cannot convict anyone or make a court finding of probable cause. Its report is a recommendation and may also serve as information for prosecutors.

Parallel investigations can still create problems if senators make claims before the evidence is checked, witnesses give conflicting accounts, or protected records are exposed carelessly. The Constitution requires the rights of people appearing in legislative inquiries to be respected.

WHAT TO WATCH

The committee should explain what new information it expects to obtain that the Ombudsman does not already have. Watch if the hearings examine failures in project selection, budgeting, inspections, payments, and contractor screening, rather than repeating accusations already sent to prosecutors.

BOTTOM LINE

Tulfo has accused the minority of blocking the flood-control hearings, but he has not shown proof that any senator formally stopped the committee from proceeding. The documented delay was the lack of a formally declared committee membership. The political fight over the Taguig accusations has made the situation harder, but it should not replace the paper trail. The real test will come when the committee announces a valid hearing, produces new records, and completes a report that enough members are willing to sign.

GOOGLE PREFERRED SOURCES

FOLLOW MCT ON GOOGLE

Google’s Preferred Sources feature lets you choose publications you want Google to prioritize for you. Select “Add to Preferred Sources” to make MCT easier to find in Top Stories and other eligible Google results. This does not subscribe you to email.

← Back to MCT home

LATEST COMMENTARY

View all commentary →

SUPPORT MCT

HELP KEEP INDEPENDENT POLITICAL WRITING GOING.

Morning Coffee Thoughts is reader-supported. Contributions help pay for research tools, hosting, and the work required to verify and explain each development.

Choose the monthly support amount you are comfortable with.Continue through PayPal
Send support through GCash or Maya0969 314 4839