Wednesday, November 29, 2006 Editorials: A debate about CICC?
THE long-running controversy over the Cebu International Convention Center (CICC) was distracting enough. A public debate between a Capitol consultant and a broadcaster is, at this stage of Asean summit preparations, distracting and wasteful.
Capitol already conceded CICC could not be fully finished on Nov. 15 but would be usable during the summit on Dec. 10 to 14.
What had stirred public skepticism was the claim that Capitol could complete CICC on the "self-imposed" deadline without reservation or qualification and then the stubbornness in sticking to the claim despite the reality at the site.
When Nov. 15 came and it was settled that it still needed what an architect euphemistically called "finishing touches," that was that. Even the new Nov. 30 deadline is not so big anymore since there's little doubt the CICC will be ready when summit opens.
Forum "for lies"
So what is this debate that Capitol consultant and adviser Pablo John Garcia wants to have with ABS-CBN anchorman and radio commentator Leo Lastimosa?
What will be the proposition---that CICC won't be used during the summit? No longer debatable unless, God forbids, its ceiling would fall.
Pablo John, a Sun.Star report yesterday said, wants the debate "to give us a forum for every lie that he (Lastimosa) said about the CICC..."
The debate issue won't be about a relevant and timely question about CICC. The debate will center on alleged sins or omissions in the broadcaster's reports and comments.
There are other ways to dispute Lastimosa's alleged lapses, the most convenient being the use of right to reply to refute the report or opinion. Nothing more face-reddening to a journalist and his bosses than being publicly shown to have deliberately erred.
To be sure, a debate can give a chance for Capitol to embarrass Lastimosa and also perk up ABS-CBN audience ratings ("samot nga di na gyod hiapsan," making its lead more unbeatable)."
Not now
But a debate is neither the means nor the forum. Not now. A debate that diverts public attention from actual summit preparations and dwells on public officials' poor choice of correcting "misinformation" can be shunned.
The challenge may be a case of wounded pride again. A retro of the unfortunate P.5M-to-P1.5M bet offer which, to recall, whetted public skepticism instead of putting to rest questions about CICC's progress.
