Talk about nothing

“I love to talk about nothing. It’s the only thing I know anything about.” This famous Oscar Wilde quote could illustrate many of the issues brought up for public debate in Macau.
That would be all right if we accept Emil Cioran’s assumption: “By all evidence, we are in the world to do nothing.” The Romanian-born writer also conjectured: “Is it possible that existence is our exile and nothingness our home?”
Had the “philosopher of despair” lived in the MSAR, he would probably write an essay about the emptiness of both public discourse and official responses to issues of substance. There are so many examples of this hapless behavior that it is difficult to know where to start - but allow me to enumerate a few cases.
When the Electoral Affairs Commission for the Chief Executive announces with solemnity that it has decided to introduce an electronic voting method for the upcoming election of the 400 Electoral College members, they are talking about nothing. What they should explain to the people, clearly and without formalisms, are the criteria used to pick those eligible to be part of the Electoral College, which almost unanimously and predictably elects the CE. And why is there only one candidate foreseeable to take the top post in the MSAR?
The Commission Against Corruption (CCAC) is talking about nothing when, in highly publicized announcements, it denounces petty cases like the one involving the person “suspected of having reaped the benefit of the MSAR government’s resources over a long period” who was, in fact, using an official car for personal matters, with the pretext of service duties… Shouldn’t CCAC be investigating the important cases of corruption that surely abound in Macau?
The so-called graveyard scandal emerged in 2010 when suspicions were raised that the former Provisional Council of Macau had illegally awarded ten graves under a perpetual lease to their applicants. Secretary Florinda Chan denied having giving instructions to the Council, asking them to do a favour for the mother of one of her advisors by granting her the concession of one “perpetual” grave at the cemetery of “São Miguel Arcanjo.” The ongoing trial of this case has caused rivers of ink to flow in the local press. It would provide a great script for a Theatre of the Absurd play. Indirectly involving Florinda Chan and directly the former president of IACM, Raymond Tam, the trial has been about questioning witnesses about their knowledge of boxes containing folders labeled as “permanent graves,” and about the whereabouts and content of certain documents that nobody recalls ever having seen. This trial is simply talking about nothing and will certainly end up in nothingness.
When we hear the Transport Bureau director, Wong Wan, saying that private vehicles are currently the bureau’s worst nightmare and then enumerating policies that would smooth traffic and reduce the crowdedness of daily public transport, we know for a fact that his talk means nothing.
“The government’s first priority is to provide good conditions for public transportation services. Now, we are focusing on bus services and the next step will be the taxi service. However, we also discovered that we have to limit the number of vehicles on our streets,” Wong Wan told the Times in an interview published in July 2011. What has happened since then regarding traffic conditions?
And what about the Environmental Protection Bureau (DSPA)? I came across these reasonable comments from JTM’s journalist Helder Almeida regarding the bureau, a body which is supposed to supervise the region’s environmental issues:
“Only now, I’m completely sure that DSPA doesn’t serve any purpose. I admit that it plays a role by employing persons that could otherwise be jobless. Hence, DSPA helps Macau to have an unemployment rate of practically null. After several weeks and some emails exchanged with this department, in order to gather more information about the toxic waste exported to Macau by a Canadian company, behold, I call and someone tells me in English that DSPA knows nothing about the issue, and that I should contact ‘other governmental departments,’ and that even if I insist, the answer will always be the same.” These lines say it all.
I end with an additional thought:  The statements and actions enumerated above exist to distract people from the things that really matter. As the Roman poet Juvenal put it: “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? – who will guard the guardians themselves?”
(By PB;  published in MDT)