LET THE PELTING BEGIN: We sense that the reading public wants columnists to define clearly their position on two burning issues: the proposed burial of the late President Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani, and the Reproductive Health bill.

I have written many opinion columns on the two subjects, but to satisfy — or whet? — the curiosity of those badgering me for my stand, here goes:

*On Marcos’ Burial – The pertinent AFP regulation allows Marcos’ burial at the Libingan ng mga Bayani (Resting Place of Heroes), but I am AGAINST it. Such interment will mean (1) recognizing him as a hero, which I think he is not, and (2) rewriting history, specifically on his despotic martial rule and his having been driven out of Malacañang by People Power in 1986. But my objection can be considered withdrawn if the “ng mga Bayani” part of the name of the military cemetery is deleted, because I will then no longer care where the family buries the cadaver now kept in a refrigerated case in his hometown of Batac. And until the government renames the Libingan, mercifully, let us drop the subject. (Btw, human rights advocate Rene Saguisag denies that a PSG guard dog was buried in the Libingan during the presidency of the late Cory Aquino.)

*On the RH Bill – I am AGAINST it. The proposed law seeks to teach school children (and grownups) how to have sex without the girl getting pregnant – and orders the government to assist the partners in being able to do it well. Those who have no children cannot see the scary scenario, but as a parent I shudder at the thought. There is no urgent need for the RH bill anyway, because in our cafeteria-style society, methods for ensuring “safe sex” and terminating unwanted pregnancies are already available over the counter. While the goal appears to be population control, this misgoverned nation may just end up with uncontrolled copulation and its attendant ills. The Aquino administration feigns concern that food production lags behind population growth. Lacking acuity, it takes the line of least resistance by opting to cut down population growth without making serious effort to boost food production and upgrade essential services. Its lazy habit of simply raising a hate-object as a distraction – in this case the Catholic Church – whenever it bumps into a knotty issue is unfortunate. The bigger culprit for our sorry state is not the growing population, but a corrupt and clueless government.

There. Now start casting them stones.

* * *

STRATEGY OR TACTICS?: A colleague wondered aloud last Monday if Palace boys think strategy or tactics. He asked because somebody from the wetlands of Candaba seated beside us said he has noticed a dearth of long-range and in-depth planning near the Pasig.

The sense many of us get from our table at Annabel’s on Morato QC is that Malacañang just flits from one fleeting issue to another.

And when a decision is to be announced, is it the President or his underlings who should do it? Days ago, no less than the Chief Executive announced an inspired solution to the spate of bus accidents. He said the key was to require every bus to have two alternating drivers!

While at it, the President might as well resolve other earthshaking questions, such as should the columns of the elevated MRT on EDSA be painted yellow or green? Or should Cabinet members use Apple’s iPad or Samsung’s Galaxy? Or should Willie Revillame be allowed to resume his “Willing Willie” show onTV5?

* * *

URONG-SULONG: The President was reported last week considering the issuance of an Executive Order imposing controls or putting a cap on the prices of oil products. That is a brilliant populist idea — if it is legally feasible.

Whether or not it was studied in depth, or whether or not it was a product of political will or a merewill-o’-the-wisp of an idea was immaterial. What mattered was that it assured complaining consumers that their President appeared to be addressing the rising prices of fuel.

Maganda na sana, but shortly after, Malacañang stopped talking of price controls. It suddenly hinted instead at intending to give some still-nebulous subsidy, which is an entirely different approach to the price issue.

That urong-sulong shuffle may look neat on the dance floor, but when seen on the level of top decision-making, it presents a sorry spectacle of the President’s advisers not thinking  problem through, but merely improvising from one issue to another. They seem to be thinking tactics, not strategy.

* * *

TRANSFER PRICING: Now the Palace says it plans to audit the giant oil firms. One item we would want checked is their practice of transfer pricing, where the mother company overseas jacks up the price of the crude oil that their corporation in the Philippines imports.

The head office abroad makes a hefty profit (off Philippine consumers) while its local company is able to show a high acquisition cost and is therefore justified in selling at a padded price. Its books will then reflect only minimal returns and occasional losses.

With an oil industry deregulation law still in effect, however, we non-lawyers cannot imagine the President issuing an Executive Order setting a price cap for petroleum products.

Even if a consensus arises in an executive-legislative consultation for adopting a mechanism to regulate the price of oil products, an Executive Order, however well-meaning, cannot go athwart an existing law.

And then, there is the question of whether or not the President is ready to tangle with the oil multinationals and, by extension, make prospective foreign investors hesitate to come in.

The ultimate mechanism for more reasonable pump prices is, of course, for irate consumers to take to the streets with violence as an option.