The complaints that public officials get when they are not around personally when major calamities strike is something that gives me mixed reactions.
On one hand, there is some schadenfreude for them going into public service. They know that those who run for public office in this country are expected to be there during the bad times, more than the good, even if their presence really doesn’t do much if the system they put in has already failed or has been proven to be effective.
Those who run for public office based on their personality and name recall are expected to show up during disasters because that’s all they can bring to the table: their personality and name recall. Them being there makes their constituents feel like they are actually working, even if their presence actually makes a minimal contribution to the improvement of the situation.
The bare minimum expectation of presence that we have from most of our public officials is why these sorts of officials often have no choice but to have their photos taken and post on social media when they do show up, because whether they like it or not, too many of their people start complaining when they don’t show up.
Those who aspire for office in this country know that is part of the hazards of the job. That means being away on a scheduled vacation leave when an unscheduled calamity strikes is a job hazard for Pinoy politicos, which is probably one reason why I don’t want to enter into politics, because I value my personal time that I am entitled to, regardless of my position or power. Those who are in public office in this country know that career or reputation can be made or broken by their luck of where they are when calamities strike. Considering that it is a job that officially doesn’t pay that well anyway, we can start to see why they feel entitled to giving themselves their own perks and bonuses.
This right to personal time, which is probably enshrined in our labor laws, is the reason why public officials who flak for going on personal trips or vacations that they officially applied for in advance, have my sympathy.
What is important for me is that those in public office have ensured that the systems are in place to deal with any eventuality when their face is not available. If you come to think of it, the goal of any chief executive, whether from the public or private sector, is to ensure that their system can cope with any situation or disaster, man-made or natural, without them needing to be personally present. The protocols, manpower, equipment, and whatever whatnots should automatically kick in so those who are on duty that day can do their jobs, whether it is saving lives or shepherding the recovery process. The presence of top officials should just be a bonus, but it is the invisible system that has been put in place that should be doing the heavy lifting.
Our problem is that we are still stuck with the politics of personality, so we demand to see those personalities when there are problems. We know that the presence of the mayor, congressman, vice mayor, or members of the city council will not stop a supertyphoon from making landfall. They cannot stop floodwaters from rising or command it to subside. Their faces cannot restore power or magically pick up fallen trees. Yet we still naively look for them when disasters strike.
As long as they have done the work of setting up the system, empowering the people, and providing the resources that are needed, their presence should be unnecessary.
If the town or city has the right systems in place, it can and should function and respond in the same manner, whether the top officials are present or not. Of course, their charismatic presence and forceful leadership might be helpful, but if they already did their job properly by building a system that is resilient and sustainable, their presence should just be a bonus and not a requirement for things to work as they should.
When a government unit responds properly, efficiently, and effectively, we don’t need to see the public officials. However, if the city is unprepared or overwhelmed, then we need to see them because we want someone to blame, even if it was ultimately us who put their ineffective asses in power in the first place.
Making sure that they can take a break without worries should be the main part of a public official’s job. However, if you come to think of it, if they succeed at that, it means they no longer become the focus because a system that works whether they show their face or not is something most of them don’t want, because they want to feel needed if they are going to be reelected.
Maybe that is why they are fine with a system that still sucks, so we still need them to parade around like peacocks every time there is a disaster.*
