MONUMENTAL ACHIEVEMENTS. PANACEA OR SIMPLE TECHNOCRATIC EXPERTISE?

Funny, how former Sec. Yap said that it was wrong for P. Noy to allude to the excessive importation of rice, without reasoning out why there were sacks of rice that just got wasted in the National Food Authority bodegas. The facts are clear: rice instead of being fed to the peopl was being eaten up by rats and thrown to the garbage trucks. So this is how rich that administration was: it could afford to throw away rice without qualms.

Well, as days pass by, we are now seeing how the officials of P. Noy will be performing in the next 6 months. I can glean the sincerity of most officials in their desire to respond to the clamor for real changes in governance. But some seem to me to be coasting along.

Hence the question remains: are we going to see monumental changes in the problems we have now, apart from the tracking down of corrupt practices and the bringing to justice of those responsible for the bankruptcy of our coffers?

I think that everyone should have that long view of where we are heading, not just a day-today response to the problems confronting us. We must have an insight, or a plan as to how we want the people to look like -- robust, healthy, happy, smiling, and worryless of where to seek shelter or get the next three meals. We must have a land full of trees, not skyscrapers. In the first place, how many people should occupy a square kilometer? thousands by bringing them up via the elevator to the 34th and 50th floors? What about the water resources -- how do we make them less thirsty and smelling of having taken a fresh bath everyday? Won't these skyscrapers make the contrast between rich and poor more blunt? Then, what about our beautiful land? How do we preserve the beauty of our rolling hills, our lakes and rivers so that they would serve as inspiration for our artists, writers, cultural workers, as well as relaxation places for our tired people?

I think this is where that cultural bent is most important. If we have a cultural perspective then we would look at the political problems from a broader perspective not in terms of centavos and pesos only. Let us cultivate that and we will find our life more interesting and colorful I think.

Meanwhile, let me raise this point. Any official whose immediate relatives appear on TV are bound to create a good or bad image of the former depending on the behavior, the spiels that come out of their mouths, and the kind of friends they keep. Last elections, we found the two highest voted-upon senators coming from the media. it was highly unfair to other candidates who did not have that much exposure in the media because that gave them the edge to be readily known by the voters.

This time, we have the highest official with a comebacking relative to tv programs. I can foresee a dilution of the highest-ratings at this time because of this occurrence. The Filipino people are not the type who would view their officials in a box. Somehow they always connect them with their relatives -- who they are, what they are doing, what their values are, etcetera.

More openly now, I think that the office of the president should be shielded from all sorts of intrigues that do not contribute to its functioning. Therefore, it would do well for relatives to no longer seek the limelight on TV as they could divert the minds of the people to the trivia they go through instead of making the people serious in helping achieve our grand dreams of a corrupt-free, sensitive and sincere government.

We know what TV, especially gameshows are, and we know how people could mouthe words that send the waves of rumours flying about. Hence, TV is not exactly a very objective medium. It even thrives best, except for public affairs on fictional stories, fantastic shows, and unrealistic presentation of events.

I do think that the relatives of government officials should be low key during their term of office so that they will be admired, judged for their performance, and also make them focussed on what they are supposed to do.

By the way, at this time, does anyone think that Kris would be a simple entertainer on TV? She is bound to make potshots here and there, and let her freedom of speech go through cyberspace without boundlessly,

During the time of Cory, she suffered from low ratings when her relatives started getting into the picture. I think that should be a lesson enough for everyone to imbibe and remember that we are in a Third World country, not divorced from the personalistic relationships that we have which could undo, reduce or even destroy what ever good mileage we have earned are now experiencing from the last elections.