Twelve senatorial hopefuls participated in last Saturday’s debate organized by GMA News. Tanong ng Bayan, which is accessible on social media for those who have not yet seen it, featured different formats for the candidates to answer questions thrown at them by the moderator, panel members, and select representatives of various sectors.
The questions covered many topics, from corruption in government, confidential funds, random drug testing, red tagging, POGOs, the West Philippine Sea, the International Criminal Court, to climate change, among others.
According to the network, it sent invitations to over 30 candidates. All but one, however– reelectionist Senator Ronald dela Rosa – of those belonging to the Magic 12, if we go by the Jan. 2025 survey by the Social Weather Stations, showed up for the debate. Other participants still have to improve their ranking because they face the very real possibility of losing, if elections were held today.
Debates are always a good way to assess the fitness of candidates beyond their prominent last names, camera-ready smiles, and catchy slogans dreamed up by their respective teams. They also afford the public the opportunity to see whether candidates actually know the work demanded of the office they are seeking, are knowledgeable about the issues that need addressing, and even answer questions about their own integrity.
Phrasing the questions fairly and instantly checking the veracity of claims made during the debate have room for improvement, but perhaps the next development the public will await is the participation of more candidates, especially those who have the advantage of already being among the likely winners.
Or is this the very reason for their smugness, their refusal to bring their platforms to the people and to address questions thrown at them by a public so desperate for answers?
Does their good survey showing or their affiliation with powerful forces justify their belief that they will get by with a wave, a smile, and a slew of motherhood statements, and have to do little else?
But they must do one thing. They must accord the electorate some respect. They must give voters credit for wanting elections to be based on issues, not personalities. Enough of the condescending notion that the masses can be had by song and dance numbers, tired cliches, false hopes, and some form of ayuda.
Let there be more debates and let there be judgment for those candidates who think they have little else to prove.