Locked on the wrong target

All the so-called experts and alleged stakeholders are up in arms about "political family corporations". Somehow the idea of family members dividing up slots for the senatorial list of candidates has become a topic for heated debate.

Or is it? In a time when a slot could mean being elected to public office or collecting a cut from campaign contributions, we the voters and customers of media have to be careful who we listen to.

What may seem as an insightful editorial on political greed or political dynasty may in fact be nothing more than a FULLY PAID lobby to dislodge relatives and relations from getting into the list of candidates.

What used to be a public trust has now become a full blown business that covers both legal, illegal and immoral. But unlike the Mafia that used force with family honor, Philippine politics uses very little force with practically no honor left.

Outside Metro Manila, simple people used to think that political quarrels were all about jueteng money, kickbacks from government contracts and political bragging rights. As one guy put it "Di bale ng walang yaman, huwag laang mawala ang yabang."

Beyond the traditional forms of income generation such as jueteng and kickbacks, politicians have also evolved into real estate consolidators, brokers, industrial partners (meaning no capital required). Labor providers, liaison for religious or organized religion, chief security provider, as well as provider for outstanding infrastructure support such as roads, traffic lights, bridges even.

So if wannabes are doing demolition jobs on each other, it may get personal but it’s nothing personal. It’s just business. Like the Mafia they have gone "LEGIT."

After doing a song and dance number on the "political family corporations", we are now hearing and reading commentators, even entertainment writers, trashing some potential candidates who are currently part of the entertainment industry.

Once again the issues of intelligence and competence are being hurled at these poor idealists. But why bark and whip these people? If a mere "housewife" led us from dictatorship to democracy without the expected bloodshed, why not others?

The critics are clearly locked on the wrong target! Instead of gunning down celebrities and stars they should train their overzealous and critical hearts at the people who do more damage or do nothing.

In particular, they should be watching all the government appointees, not just those holding cabinet positions or ambassadors, but even down to bureau level or directorships or board seats.

Unlike actual candidates running in an election, these political appointees hold titles or positions that are no longer merely ceremonial or ministerial.

These appointees hold court over vital services and offices that directly affect the economy, national security, national development and our quality of life. While everyone talks about short term and medium term development plans, these appointees rarely have a well researched and coordinated agenda for the day to day operations of departments and bureaus.

The appointees have merely specialized on sucking up to the powers that are, while carefully studying when to step in or when to bail out. They make no real financial investments and on many occasions they are HIGHLY COMPETENT for the job.

I suspect that one of the reasons government programs and social action fails to trickle down has a lot to do with the delays caused by INCOMPETENT & BIASED Cabinet members who are unsure of policy.

They use up vital time for their learning curve and have to cross-check with undersecretaries who are sandwiched by equally incompetent politically appointed directors and consultants brought in by the favored "outsiders".

At a time when politics has intentionally been polarized in order to disable or discredit political or social opposition, it is NECESSARY for all citizens not just the media to demand for qualified public servants but real public servants and not parasites enjoying corporate privileges.

If Che Che Lazaro and her probe team were to investigate conflict of interest and conspiracy, it would be very interesting what they could show about media practitioners and media outfits who dance with government in exchange for board seats, directorships, or advantage.

Unfortunately we need to pass laws that would at the very least make it mandatory for any President or appointing official to appoint only those who have actual scholastic training or actual work experience and excelled relative to the position to be given.

In addition such appointments should have consultation with a governing body or organizations representative of the area or field of concern to vouch for the candidate’s credibility and absence of bias.

Perhaps the law should automatically disqualify members of such organizations to avoid conflict of interest. The Office of the Press Secretary and offices related to media concerns has repeatedly and continues to be populated by incompetents from media who have strained relations with the working media.

"Respected" has often been an absent word when referring to these past and present advisers for media concerns in Malacañang. Some have been exceptionally good, but the bad are REALLY BAD.

Such a law should also disqualify or prohibit any elected official from resigning the elected position in exchange for an appointive position. I’ve been told that it is in fact a violation not to finish an elected term because of the OATH OF OFFICE except no one has really brought up the matter to the Supreme Court.

If we demand a higher standard in the education and competence of elected public officials, should we not begin to set our guns on appointees who can manipulate elections, provide escort for electoral fixers, divert funds from road taxes or agricultural developments or implements policy that gives economic advantage to favored sectors only?