Too cocky

Here are excerpts from a news report on a statement of a politician turned government agency secretary –

“BAGUIO CITY — Global warming and urban decay cannot be blamed on overpopulation, Environment Secretary Lito Atienza said here Saturday.

Atienza made the assertion during a tree-planting activity at the Camp John Hay forest reservation to jump-start a counter-global warming campaign.

He said good resource management would correct anomalies that have spawned homelessness and poverty, and should be enough to address the hole in the ozone layer.

The United States had raised the matter of overpopulation to justify its decision not to ratify the protocol, which was pushed by former Vice President Al Gore.

It argued that the restrictions should also cover China and India because of their big populations.

Although many equate overpopulation with climate change because of the subsequent increase in motor vehicle emissions and heightened industrial expansion, population has never been a serious condition to draw the interest of world environmentalists, Atienza said.

The Philippines need not alter its climate change policy because it does not contribute as much greenhouse gases as developed countries do, he said.

Atienza said overpopulation should be embraced and not feared by cities.”

Well, here comes another person assuming different roles in governance without really thinking first of things said in public. This is really sad. For the past two decades since the publication of “Our Common Future” people (not just “overpopulation’) has had a role in the disposition of the environment. How else can the environment be in the shape it is in now? Aren’t all the changes done by people? How much more if there is “overpopulation?” We have to make a definition of what this means, though. For example, Manila can hold only 1 million people scattered comfortably in the land of a thousand square kilometers (figures are not accurate, given only for comparison). That’s not overpopulation. But if these same 1 million is concentrated in an area of a hundred kilometers, then that is “overpopulation.” Which means that the way the city is laid out population has become a problem.

The situation is bad enough but when local bureaucrats take pot shots at other countries environment policies that’s a little too cocky given the bad reputation that this country already possess in the international community. The bureaucrat should also quit commenting and making generalized statements such as “population has never been a serious condition to draw the interest of world environmentalists.” It sadly shows the very limited abilities of those governing this country. At the least, it also shows the lack of good background reading and research.

The point here is that we all need good resource management, (which includes human resource) as well as a good population distribution, more service oriented governance, and less personal politics.