triobranding.blogg.se

70s plastic whistle phone scam
70s plastic whistle phone scam






Payumo also referred to another network of NGOs, which allegedly benefited from pork barrel allocations. Proxies were not allowed, so those who signed the receiving forms were the actual farmers who used them,” he said. Before they would make deliveries, I would ask them how many people would be the beneficiaries, and then tell the village chairmen here. “They delivered … I got beneficiaries from the different villages in Dinalupihan. Payumo said these were not ghost projects. She also informed Payumo that Jose Evangelista II, deputy chief of staff, had been authorized “to sign the pertinent documents and ensure the proper implementation of these projects.” In a letter on April 19, 2012, lawyer Jessica “Gigi” Reyes, then Enrile’s chief of staff, also endorsed POPDFI. In a letter on July 18, 2012, Yvonne Geston, chief administrative and finance officer of Legarda’s office, endorsed POPDFI to Payumo as a “conduit project partner,” in order to “expedite the immediate implementation of this project.” He said it was Legarda, Estrada and Enrile who designated POPDFI as the project implementer. It is the only inland town in Bataan, “so farm inputs benefit our community.” We are just grateful,” he said.Īccording to Payumo, 70 percent of Dinalupihan is composed of farmland. “If your local government was given these funds, you don’t question why they should be the ones to implement and not us. “This was stated in the letters to us by the senators themselves,” said Payumo.

70s plastic whistle phone scam

He said he agreed with Luy and Suñas that although the check representing funds for the project would be sent to Dinalupihan, “they would be the ones to implement the project.” Payumo said principal whistle-blower Benhur Luy and Suñas went to Dinalupihan to deliver the items. When they come, and tell you that, of course, you don’t ask if they are bogus or not. “We have been writing senators and implementing agencies for in Dinalupihan, just like any other local government would do. Saro is a document from the Department of Budget and Management signifying the availability of funds for a project. We have all the necessary documents to account for everything.”Īsked how he was able to get funds through the senators, Payumo said representatives from POPDFI went to Dinalupihan and informed the local government it had a Special Allotment Release Order (Saro) from a senator intended for the town. It said there was “no final utilization report, no liquidation report, no warranty for procurement of farm supplies.”īut Payumo said: “How can that be? The COA was there during the distribution, and they inspected it before it was given to the beneficiaries.

70s plastic whistle phone scam

The Commission on Audit (COA) said a review of the fund transferred to POPDFI, amounting to P38 million from the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) of Senators Juan Ponce Enrile, Loren Legarda and Jinggoy Estrada, showed that the Dinalupihan government had “failed to submit the necessary supporting documents needed upon the release, implementation and liquidation of funds as required by the COA.” (POPDFI), headed by whistle-blower Merlina Suñas, delivered to the town “organic agrarian implement packages” each worth P36,450, “high-value yield enhancement packages” each costing P20,500, and farm inputs and implements worth P20,500 per package. He said the People’s Organization for Progress and Development Foundation Inc. “We were just the end user, and there were deliveries made to us,” Payumo said.

70s plastic whistle phone scam

Former Mayor Joel Payumo acknowledged that Dinalupihan received funds from an NGO linked to Napoles but he said the local government was not part of the scam.








70s plastic whistle phone scam