The death of five children in a garbage container in Bijie, Guizhou Province has become the focus of public opinion. It is the first case of livelihood problems that has attracted extensive attention since the 18th Party congress. Eight local officials were punished because of the tragedy. Debate on whether the punishment is appropriate mirrors the divergence in public opinion over sensitive issues.

The consolidation of China's political process doesn't necessarily guarantee a prosperous livelihood for all. Various issues or scandals will continue to occur. Just yesterday, the media exposed how 38 households were squeezed into a 100-square meter apartment for rent in Beijing.

Enhancing the aid to the poorest is the main task of China's civil affairs departments. The anger over livelihood issues generates the most vigorous public debates. Those grass-roots stories are more appealing than political debates over the national path.

China has to overcome a series of difficult problems. It has relatively abundant resources and means for poverty assistance. It's impossible to totally eliminate poverty, but achievements in poverty alleviation are measurable. Improvements to the lives of the poorest could be greatly inspiring for all of society.

China's achievements in reducing poverty have been highly spoken of by the UN. But this cannot offset the poverty problems in media reports. The public is putting higher expectations on the country, it seems that at any time government efforts are considered inadequate to fulfill these expectations.

Extreme cases that affect people's livelihoods can easily provoke public outrage, which not only focuses on the issue itself, but also on institutional loopholes. Extreme cases and scandals can exacerbate  public dissatisfaction.  The authorities cannot appease this dissatisfaction, nor can they dominate the direction of public opinion.

The exposure of scandals should promote the progress of the country rather than stirring up more suspicions of the national system. The government should devote more to improving livelihoods. It should mobilize all of society to alleviate poverty. The concern that the participation of some non-governmental forces in charity may exert political influence is not necessary. The last thing the government has to control is charity.

The dominance of the government in terms of charity and civil affairs in recent years has made the public believe the government has taken on the full responsibility for poverty alleviation. But the solution to the problem cannot solely rely on the government.

The livelihood cases exposed by the media are all national tragedies. They provide a driving force from the grass roots to solve these problems. But if public opinion only focuses on criticizing the national system, there will be more confusion rather than reflection.

Increasing efforts to help the poorest is the only choice of the administration. As poverty alleviation has become an explosive issue for the public, the interaction between the public and officials should be enhanced. Public opinion cannot be neglected.