OPINION | WHEN THE WATER RUNS DRY, POLITICAL SLOGANS WON'T FILL THE PAIL

By: Andrea XP de Jesus

The El Niño crisis demands more than outrage and promises. It requires preparation, coordination, measurable results, and accountability at every level of government.

Imagine a mother waking up early, not to prepare breakfast, but to find out whether water will flow from her faucet that morning.

Imagine a farmer watching his crops dry, a small business owner worrying about electricity costs, and a family wondering how it will survive another week of rising expenses.

For these Filipinos, El Niño is not a political talking point. It is a threat to their livelihood, food, health, and daily survival.

And this is precisely why the country cannot afford to turn a national preparedness challenge into another contest of political slogans.

The Philippine News Agency reported on October 19, 2026, that agricultural damage associated with El Niño had reached an estimated ₱6.87 billion, affecting approximately 223,000 farmers and fisherfolk. The national government also reported setting aside ₱7.86 billion for disaster response.

These figures should command serious attention.

The government has announced measures involving water security, agricultural assistance, hospital preparedness, energy supply, and public health. Among the reported interventions are water tankers, stationary water tanks, cloud seeding, agricultural support, and energy contingency measures.

These are important preparations, but announcements and allocations must eventually translate into actual protection for communities.

The question is no longer simply whether the government has a plan. The question is whether that plan will reach the people who need it most.

Will farmers receive assistance before their livelihoods collapse? Will vulnerable households have access to safe drinking water? Will health facilities remain capable of responding to heat-related illnesses? Will schools and essential public services continue operating despite extreme temperatures?

These are the questions that should dominate public discussion.

Unfortunately, national problems can easily become political opportunities. Some political voices reduce every government response to propaganda, while others treat every announcement as proof that everything is under control.

Both approaches are inadequate.

Criticism is necessary. Government agencies must be questioned about delayed interventions, insufficient resources, inaccurate assessments, and failures in implementation. But criticism must also be constructive, evidence-based, and accompanied by workable alternatives.

It is not enough to declare that the system is broken without explaining how communities can be protected while reforms are pursued.

Likewise, the government cannot hide behind the existence of a budget or a contingency plan when families are still experiencing shortages and farmers are losing their crops.

Preparedness must be measured by what happens on the ground, not by what is written in a press release or shouted from a political platform.

This is where local governments become particularly important.

Barangays must identify vulnerable households. Agricultural offices must monitor affected farms. Health offices must prepare for climate-related health concerns. Water providers must communicate supply conditions and contingency arrangements. Disaster management offices must establish clear warning and response mechanisms.

These efforts require coordination, reliable information, and regular monitoring.

They also require citizens to participate responsibly by conserving water, following legitimate public advisories, reporting local concerns, and helping identify households that may need assistance.

For organizations that claim to represent the poor, the challenge is equally clear: move beyond political mobilization and help strengthen community preparedness. Support accurate information, encourage constructive participation, and help ensure that assistance reaches vulnerable sectors.

There is nothing wrong with demanding accountability. But the people need more than permanent outrage. They need practical solutions, honest assessments, and measurable improvements.

The same principle applies to government: public service must not be reduced to publicity.

The coming months will test the country's capacity to prepare for climate-related risks. The poorest households, small farmers, informal workers, senior citizens, and children will be among those who need protection and support.

We cannot wait until reservoirs run low, crops fail, and families line up for emergency assistance before recognizing the urgency of preparedness.

A pail cannot be filled by promises. A farmer cannot recover through slogans. And a community cannot become resilient through political arguments alone.

The measure of leadership is whether people are protected before disaster strikes, assisted when hardship comes, and supported until they recover.

When the water runs dry, Filipinos do not need another political battle over who is right.

They need water, food, electricity, health services, livelihood support, and leaders who can deliver.

That is what genuine public service looks like.