By Churchill Aguilar
WITH too much political squabble in our local government, I simply don’t know where to begin. The bickering of the opposing sides as to who has the biggest unliquidated cash advances made a circus out of something that should have been seen as plain lapse of responsibility.
Let’s go back to the basics. If someone is entrusted with people’s money at his own disposal, the least he could do is liquidate them. We are not even asking how he should spend them or what his priorities should be; we simply ask what we deserve to know, i.e., where did our money go? If he spent our taxes in building roads and infrastructure then well and good. If he spent it paying for employees who worked to make our province a better place then much the better––not only did he provide employment, he has also provided our fellow citizens the chance to be part of social progress. But then again we just have to know. They (all, including past governors) owe us at least that.
But what confounds me is that instead of sitting down with their accountants to settle their unliquidated dues, they had to play the game of who was the greater evil in the picture and then pass the blame on other people. I’m pretty sure they can liquidate all their accounts in one day without dragging the issue this long––unless they don’t know where it went, and in that case, it shows just the kind of leader that they are.
From where I stand, I think the two strongest contenders that are wrangling over the issue are both accomplished leaders. Their track records prove their worth. I know for a fact how educated they are. What I don’t get is how they succumb to gutter-like bickering to the point of making everything about themselves when in fact the real victims here are the citizens if there are ever victims for that matter.
In all of my write-ups I have been quite careful never to take sides. I have a strong conviction that effective leadership is never grounded on personalities but on principles and causes. But if I were asked who I should vote for in the next election, I would say I will vote for whoever owns up to his lapses without any excuses and then sits down to correct them––in this case, the unliquidated cash advances. That way, he shows strong accountability in his governance. More so, I will vote for the one who will have full disclosure as to how he spent our tax money, even if people have not even demanded for it. That way he shows strong transparency in his governance. And finally, I will vote for the one who will take time to check whether the people agree with his priorities or not in so far as how he spends our money. That way it shows how he encourages participation and societal engagement in his governance.
The bickering that is happening right now sickens me to the stomach since it shows that we have not progressed much in our political conduct. Accountability, transparency, and participation are simply non-negotiable in leadership. Gone are the feudal days where leaders don’t have to answer for anyone but themselves. And so before these things get dragged longer, I call on the two strongest contenders to man up and be men of honor more than anything else. I’m sure they both have it in them. The “lesser evil” strategy just doesn’t cut it anymore.They should liquidate their cash advances now and show us where it went. That way they can set a high standard of accountability and transparency for the younger generations of leaders, and at the end of this all the people wins.