Very few, if any, Guyanese will ever forget the Mahdia fire tragedy and its ongoing ramifications. To the families and relatives of the deceased and their peers who have been directly and indirectly affected by this monumental disaster, Guyana must seem dystopian, to say the least. Twenty lives snuffed out, others possibly hanging in the balance, a minor charged, i’s dotted, t’s crossed, case closed and tied with a bow; now back to the regular programming. Is that it? It should not be. The status quo is abhorrent.
Three days of national mourning were declared for the initial 19 lives so cruelly shortened. That was hardly enough. For the empathetic, even those far removed from the disaster geographically, the cumulative shock felt on Monday May 22 and the rest of last week as the news spread is yet to dissipate. The grief and sense of helplessness will also remain for some time to come. Debates will long continue with regard to decisions made or not made, as might be the case, before, during and after Sunday May 21. There is one constant. Things must change.
Obviously, there was a tremendous lack of foresight when the now burnt building was erected. On the other hand, it could also be the case that a decision was made to construct on the cheap. Minister of Home Affairs Robeson Benn was quoted as saying: “… the fire got into the plastic type ceiling and proceeded along the roof with burning pieces falling onto beds…” A ghastly diagnosis, but there it is.
The plastic type ceiling referred to is likely polyvinyl chloride (PVC), which while attractive and inexpensive when compared to other ceiling materials, is also deadly. When heated or burned, PVC ceiling tiles are extremely toxic. They emit gases such as hydrogen-chloride, benzene, and vinyl chloride among others. When one considers that in any conflagration, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide are also present, the danger only increases. The likelihood of pulmonary problems immediately or in the future is high. Furthermore, PVC has also been linked to cancer.
According to the Guyana Fire Service (GFS), it had flagged the now-destroyed girls’ dormitory at Mahdia for violating the code not once, but twice, though it only referred to the iron grills on the windows. The GFS has also since revealed that it had recently inspected the boys’ dorm at the same location along with other government buildings in the vicinity. One can safely assume that the Mahdia boys’ dorm was built similarly to the girls’ and therefore the same safety infractions exist. Was the boys’ abode also flagged as hazardous in November last year and February this year? One can only hope that it is now being addressed expeditiously.
Further, the GFS said that it had begun inspecting schools and dormitories countrywide last month. Given the attention the department said it paid to Mahdia, one can assume that inspections in general are carried out fairly frequently. Several questions come to mind. Firstly, what other schools and dormitories have the GFS found lacking? Secondly, apart from the operators of these facilities, who else is privy to the reports? Thirdly, does the GFS have the legal standing to act if buildings are not up to code?
While one hopes that the GFS’s inspection of buildings is extensive and vigilant, if the powers that be remain non-compliant, then the unsuspecting public is still in danger. In some countries, fire departments have the authority to issue public warnings, and institute penalties or fines if they are not heeded within a specific timeframe. Clearly that is not the case here.
It is now pellucid that the warnings or recommendations with regard to fire safety at the Mahdia girls’ dorm were ignored. It must be surmised then that similar risks exist elsewhere, though the mere thought of this is mind boggling. What, one wonders, is the state of affairs at other high-traffic government buildings? What of daycare centres? Are fire codes up to par at homes for the indigent and elderly? What about the low-income houses that are being built for the less fortunate? There are more questions than answers.
At a time like this, one cannot help but wonder again at the priorities of those who lead us. Millions are expended on unnecessary undertakings, while children are shortchanged and placed in buildings that are likely to make them ill or cause their death. Among the white elephants immediately called to mind are the now desolate D’Urban Park and the Harpy Eagle Monument on the Mandela to Eccles road. There are many others.
If there is not drastic change in the way things are done going forward, those 20 children would have died in vain. What happened on May 21 is not an incident that can ever be glossed over and tossing criminal charges at a child is not the remedy either. Citizens must demand action from those in authority aimed at righting all of the wrongs that will prevent any such tragedy from ever occurring again.
