WHEN super typhoon Yolanda hit Tacloban City in November 2013, among the government officials who were there was then Interior and Local Government secretary Mar Roxas, who was designated as the point person for the government’s disaster risk reduction and management effort in the area. He would later run for president in the 2016 polls and criticized for his statement on then city mayor Alfred Romualdez. Roxas’s presence there in such critical time was downplayed.
I was reminded of this overlooked point in the 2016 elections with the report about local government executives from the Cordillera Administrative Region and the Cagayan Valley who were not in their areas of responsibility at the height of the onslaught of typhoon Ompong. The report, however, didn’t mention the names of the mayors and their jurisdictions.
“Bakit nandito sila sa Maynila habang ‘yung kanilang mga lalawigan at munisipyo ay dinaraanan ng bagyo? That to me is gross neglect and should be investigated,” said Sen. Franklin Drilon. Sen. Panfilo Lacson’s description of the absence? “Negligence or parang being insensitive.”
I didn’t know that in such cases the mayors can only leave their jurisdictions to attend to “life and death” matters outside. But that need not even been made into a law or a rule. As chief executive, being with your constituents in times of calamities is a natural consequence of your aspiring to lead them.
I remember engaging a colleague in a debate of sorts in the aftermath of Yolanda’s onslaught on Tacloban that left thousands dead mainly from the storm surge that devastated parts of the city. There were reports of some city government officials not taking the lead in rescue efforts because they themselves had to attend to the typhoon’s devastation of their homes.
My colleague called me insensitive when I said that city government officials should have taken the lead in helping their constituents recover from the devastation. It was apparent that recovery efforts there went directionless for a time, with the dead left lying in places where they lost their lives.
I was, of course, conscious of the point that my saying that city government officials, especially Romualdez, should have taken the lead in rescue and rehabilitation efforts is because I was in a safe haven in Cebu. But I was talking about leadership. When a person runs for a public office, he or she should consider the fact that if he or she wins, he or she should be a leader in good or bad times.
There were actually instances in the past when adversities tested my leadership and I failed to pass the test. One scene continues to haunt me now, the one wherein I ran away to save my life, momentarily leaving behind a mother carrying a child traversing a footpath on a difficult slope. I promised to make amends after that, which I did under an almost similar scenario months later.
I say this should be a lesson for those who want to run for local government posts next year. Being a government official is not only about power and influence. It is also about responsibilities whose implementation would test our willingness to sacrifice our safety and even our lives.