We are on the eve of the twenty first century, and we are trying to overcome a most complex economic, financial and political crisis, We have priorities claiming not only clear ideas but also transparent attitudes by us and our readiness to solve them. In a few words, we are facing the trial of fire of ethical reason. Faced with this, a reflection, an exercise of understanding and awareness are required. One of these priorities is the downsizing of Government. President Caldera's government, as well as most of the political spokesmen and the media, as well as the institutions still counting in the domestic spectrum, share the idea that this challenge must be attacked by reducing the bureaucratic dimension of Government, on the one hand, and its pernicious interference with all of the economy's or public life's affairs. When talking of Government downsizing it looks as if we were referring to the Executive only and that the governors' and mayors' offices are not part of the monster called State and that, consequently, the turn has arrived for them to make the error of increasing their size and of committing resources not being held now and most likely becoming a heavy burden -a most difficult to meet obligation. The remark is valid for other sectors, specially those covering themselves with the blanket of administrative autonomy. We could mention other priorities: that of building trust of the legal system, that of not using the judiciary to settle rivalries or internal quarrels to be solved on the streets or political conventions. There are those who proclaim the dignifying of the judiciary, but who hide under the cuff some recourse being incompatible with this dignity. When talking in this manner we are not fostering impunity -this should be perfectly clear.

We do propitiate civilized dialog, the exchange of ideas, the adoption of decisions belonging to all, because the problems hat me must face may not be solved by any factor, no matter how powerful it may be. It requires the government's disposition to govern with all and for all, and, in this task, dialog and concert are indispensable resources.

Among national priorities we have, there is no doubt about it, the defense of the presidential majesty. We know this is necessary, convenient and, finally, desirable for all. The image of a serious and respectable country we must, and want to, build for Venezuela starts with it. As independent citizens, we call for respect in political combat. As independent citizens and committed observers, we call for loyalty between adversaries, something that, unequivocally, is also loyalty to ourselves and our permanent interests. To debate, accordingly, on a trial of the President of the Republic is to gamble, without caring for the course followed by the country nor for the emergencies or crisis it may face. The risks are too severe as not to be a warning being able to move us to be cautious, considered to make reason be the guide. Let us preserve these values, let us enrich them thinking of what is good for all, and let us refrain from treading out or keep treading out the road of unfruitful destruction. Venezuela's problems are extremely serious, both in their external as in its internal dimension. Let us promote, then, civilized dialog and the search of so many things we have in common.