The morning after

In a sense, Christmas in England does not really begin until the morning after. The 26th of December is referred to in England as Boxing Day. When I first came to live in London, I thought that Boxing Day was some tribute to boxers since boxing to me as I was taught in American English is the sport. How surprised I was when I learned that boxing meant the act of putting gifts in boxes. It has been the tradition on this day after Christmas that employers give presents to their servants, tradespeople (i.e., the milkman, the garbage collector, the postman, etc.). It is usually a gift of money and the whole idea is that those who have more give enough to those who have less. In a way even itinerants can come to your door for money.

These presents came to be known as Christmas boxes. In rural parts of England and Wales, it was traditional for small boys to capture a robin and take it in a box from house to house, asking for alms. The tradition of Boxing Day is part and parcel of the celebration of an English, or more appropriately now British Christmas. It is a legal and bank holiday meaning banks are closed on that day. So today is a very important day in England, Wales, parts of Canada, and in some other countries of the British commonwealth nations.

I think it is a good tradition because although we give gifts and bonuses to those who work for us it is treated like an obligation and according to law rather than generosity. With a special day for gift-giving, Boxing Day focuses on the real spirit of Christmas and how it ought to be celebrated.

I am not surprised that there is a growing controversy on how to celebrate Christmas. As one report said this has been going on for years. Christians have appropriated the holidays as a commemoration of the birth of Jesus Christ. So what of those who do not believe in the nativity of God in Bethlehem? Can you still celebrate Christmas? Of course, because the whole world celebrates Christmas regardless of whether they believe in the virgin birth or not. Admittedly it has become more and more secular and materialistic. But sticking only to the celebration as a commeration of the birth of Jesus Christ can be more divisive rather than inclusive. To be able to cherish the holidays, and in harmony with other religions it may be more appropriate to celebrate it as a day of sharing, or as the pagans did, to celebrate the end of long, dark December days of the winter solstice.

Americans will have to deal with the disharmony the celebration of Christmas has spawned more so because the traditionalists feel let down by President George W. Bush as the champion of the right and tradition. Indeed, there is much to learn from the argument that instead of appropriating Christmas as belonging only to Christians, we should make it all inclusive whatever religion. At the same time, making it secular does not mean, being materialistic. After all, as I have mentioned already in another column, its origins were in communion with nature. It need not be selfish nor materialistic to celebrate the end of the winter solstice. It is neutral. By all means Christians ought to celebrate it the way they see fit but it should not be enforced on everyone. The idea of sharing is good and universal and that is not necessarily Christian.

* * *

WELCOME NEWS. As travelers and consumers of airport services, we find the announcement of President GMA that the government was expropriating NAIA Terminal 3 is to be welcomed. As this column has said many times, the approach to this problem should be that it is a public service being paid for and yet denied. At the same time, there are legal questions, most of which are centered on just how much PIATCO-FRAPORT have to be compensated.

By expropriating Terminal 3, President GMA has separated the legal issues from the public service. The sovereign government as she has rightly said has the right, even the obligation to do so while legal questions and compensation are still being worked out.

The public can only be benefited by President GMA’s move. As she said the Government will take steps to complete and operate the Terminal as soon as possible in interest of public interest. The legal question and cost of compensation falls on the shoulders of the builders of the terminal. They will bear the brunt of the government move. They will have to fight hard to get their money’s worth. Investors can be discouraged by the expropriation if it is seen that it was in anyway unfair to the builders of the airport. As a consumer-traveler I am benefited by the move, but as a long term citizen, I am fearful of the consequences of the act even if the government was right. Whether the government will be fair to all those who made the building of the airport possible will be watched keenly by the rest of the world, especially the investment community. More so, if it will be seen as favoring other vested interest which resent the accomplishment of builders of the airport.

I repeat, my concern as a user of the airport is that I get what I pay for. That does not exclude my sense of justice and fairness. It is hoped that the legal issues and compensation to the builders will be solved amicably and fairly.

President GMA herself has made the assurance that ‘just compensation will be paid in accordance with Philippine law.’ Let us hope so.

* * *

LETTER FROM A CONSUMER. Like many others, Dr. Percival Punzal of the Philippine Heart Center <[email protected]> welcomed the news. He told this column that the opening of NAIA-3 was good news despite the controversies surrounding it. "The old NAIA-1 is just not suited anymore for the purpose it was originally built and has proven to be a welcome/farewell eyesore for both local and foreign travellers. In this day and age where NEWS means disaster, crime, death and war, it is indeed a welcome respite.

This view highlighting the angle from public interest began with a column I wrote on "Bedlam in the Airport". I experienced the bedlam myself having had to stand for four hours before being able to come into the building.. Since then I have received dozens of letters like Dr. Punzalan’s.They came mostly from travelers who have experienced the horrors of NAIA 1. But it was not just travelers who suffered. So did business and trade. Indeed, the whole country suffered because of an inadequate airport while a spunking new airport stood idly by. In other countries when a public service is under litigation, the government isolates the public service so it can continue to be run efficiently. At the same time, the government has to be fair. While we hail the opening of NAIA 3 we also hope that the dispute will be settled justly and amicably.

* * *

E-mail: [email protected]