UNIFICATION (What Now...?) By Mars Cavestany Featured


The Unification Movement initiated by PCHN publisher Evelyn Zaragoza since June 2017 has been making inroads into our community life, thus .enhancing the social fabric.
Enhancing the social fabric, means allowing for more and better healthy interactions and expression of shared values, creating deeper sense of awareness and understanding, as well as developing a more critical outlook through logical thinking, rational analysis, as well as investigative accountability of the officials of the various organizations to which we belong.
The end goal of unification is for all members of the community to sustain pro-active, action-driven engagement, ready and willing to help one another especially those with special needs at all times, and be inspired to keep our community a positive, pleasant place to live.
Thus far, there has been two no-holds-barred Unification Discussion Meetings held at the Marayong Community Centre in 20th August and at the Sizzling Filo Restaurant in 22nd October, a complete reportage of which were bannered on this paper.
As is the nature of the freedom of expression, we welcome the fact that the very headlines alone of the October issue banner news (UNIFICATION RECONCILES PCC & APCO) along with its matching editorial (PCC AND APCO RECONCILE AT LONG LAST) had launched a volley of complaints.
As well, we are heartened that criticisms are manifold, that is, met with widespread acclaim and praise by some, yet drew enormous negative attention from both camps of PCC and APCO.
However, when passions run high enough, it is understandable that some readers make a litmus test of our reports then make rush conclusions. Too often in the process, they get carried away by their emotions ignoring the actual substance of the news report.
What we're saying is, the accusations levied on us remain on the level of “allegations”, couched in general, motherhood statements without pinpointing specifics. Where have we gone wrong, pray tell?
The general practice when anyone corrects a supposed mistake in anything published is to underline and quote the error, then suggest or offer to rectify it with the appropriately acceptable correction. If we are wrong, certainly we shall be first to publish an erratum. .
None of that appears on both emailed personal response of PCC President as well as that of the official statement of APCO that have been heaped upon on our Unification efforts.
The publisher of this paper and its editor still await concrete and definitive position statements from PCC and APCO even as we look forward to the results of each groups’ further meetings where the most contentious issue of “RECONCILIATION” shall be tackled hopefully in depth and in length.
Meanwhile, we invite readers to have a closer read of the editorial page where much of the “allegations” are addressed.
Without waving our own flag, fact is, the first three-in-a-series of continuing reportage on the development of the Unification Movement has created quite a stir, enough to get people involved and continuously discussing the crying issues of the day as in the two Unification Discussion/Community Consultation Meetings we have so far conducted.
What is more, the two peak/umbrella groups framed at the centre of the controversy of whether to reconcile or not at all, have now taken notice. The initial fruitful discussions have paved the way towards more argumentations.
As of press time, we are informed that past prexy Kate Andres has taken the cudgels to call for another meeting that will once and for all settle the issue of reconciliation on the side of PCC.
As for APCO, even if an official press release has been issued, we gathered that affiliates who have not been thoroughly informed and appraised of the situation are demanding a consensus that the body agreed to resolve via a referendum.
All these developments are positive proof that the original intent of the Unification Movement initiator/convenor Evelyn Zaragoza has been brought to fruition.
To wit: The main objective is to open all communication lines and attract a consensus of opinions from all sectors and members of the Filipino-Australian community as well a fellow Australians that shall serve as springboard for more concerted and definitive actions. (Unification, PCHN Turns 23, June-July issue).
True enough, Unification raised a flood of questions, and it is only a matter of time for these questions to be answered. Surely, it always takes two to tango, but if PCC and APCO simply couldn’t just get along, then we’ll leave it at that.
But let us stop pointing accusing fingers at each other. Do not crucify us for attempting to reconcile the irreconcilable. At least we tried. But it doesn’t end there because of the promise of the Task Force Unification.
When all is said and done, “Unification” is not a fizzer. It has motivated, driven, and caused our community to react responsibly, thereby showing the true picture and state of affairs.
As of this writing, the Consulate has confirmed that the reconciliation meeting between the two presidents only that Consul Marford Angeles proposed to undertake during the Oct. 22 meeting as duly recorded in the minutes, has not materialised for one reason or another. Meantime, Consul Angeles sent us the following text:
(Evelyn please insert in full.)
(All Rights Reserved/Mars Cavestany)

Read 15222 times
Rate this item
(0 votes)

About Author

Login to post comments