“The fire safety in (Mahdia) dormitory as major concern –
The buildings have no fire alarm system,
Guidelines to use the fire extinguishers (need more with fire buckets and training)
Windows have metal bars and doors are locked at nights- to prevent students misbehaviour
Fire exit doors need to be openable for emergency exit.
Signs and emergency lights at night to indicate exits.
Fire drill is required”
These are the findings of Deen and Partners into the conditions at the Mahdia Dormitory Plant as contained in the annex to the Ministry of Education/UNICEF Dormitories Report dated May 24 2022 and subsequently submitted to the subject minister.
Almost exactly one year later on May 21 2023 all of the above conditions were still in place and the lack of any action to rectify even one of these deficiencies resulted in the deaths of 20 children. As part of its recommendations Deen and Partners estimated it would cost only $500,000 to install a fire alarm system with smoke detectors at the Mahdia dormitory along with fire exit signs and emergency lights. That’s $25.000 to save each of these children’s lives.
The annex states that among those consulted when it came to the Mahdia dormitory plant were the Ministry of Education Administration and Planning and the Regional Education Office along with the Head teacher and dormitory staff.
The question then remains who among them raised this matter of “major concern” and when precisely did the ministry know about these “major concerns” at Mahdia and at other dormitories?
A chart in the annex demonstrates Deen and Partners’ understanding that the Deputy Chief Education Officer (DCEO) was part of the management of the Mahdia dorm along with the Regional Administration, and that the Regional Education officer for Region Eight answered both to the DCEO and the regional administration That is why the testimony of the Chief Education Officer to the Commission of Inquiry that it was not for Region Four to interfere in the Region Eight’s education department was so disingenuous.
In a letter to this newspaper Deen Kamaludeen of Deen and Partners wrote that “it was the Planning Department of the Ministry of Education that provided the technical framework and required that an annex (document referenced in SN editorial) to be developed, which outlines the facilities’ condition assessment and include cost projection for retrofitting or reconstruction of dormitory plants to meet the minimum benchmark of the new standards.”
So if the planning department required the annex why did no one apparently read it?
It is also informative that the annex spells out the deficiencies at that particular dorm as the suggestion has been that the report only talks generally about a woeful lack of safety systems at all dorms and this was considered the (false) rationale for the lack of action.
One must wonder however whether highlighting this deficiency more explicitly in the final report might have made a difference. For example the Chief Education Officer defended his ministry’s decision not to address the Mahdia dormitory deficiencies right away as that it was not in the “Top Five” needing attention. That would suggest that in coming up with the Top Five, fire safety was given equal treatment to other less life threatening upgrades. As it is the ministry was consulted regarding Mahdia and secondly the report does refer to the annex on multiple occasions. Any diligent public servant would have then gone through the annex.
Aside from the fire concerns, the annex on Mahdia highlights major overcrowding (which might in fact have contributed to the deaths), poor ventilation, “excessive heat”, an abundance of “mosquitoes and flies”, power and water rationing, one shower for 38 occupants as well as the general “shabby” facilities. Even if there was no major concern over fire safety should not these subhuman conditions that these indigenous students were living in have been dealt with immediately?
While the government and the subject minister have looked to avoid blame at every turn and tidy up any legal loose ends with a pitiful compensation package, it is imperative that 1) those at the highest levels are held responsible if not in a court of law then in the court of public opinion and 2) that such a disaster does not happen again. On the first count we are not hopeful that the Commission of Inquiry will produce a report that gets to the core of the issues that led up to the calamity. It is a missed opportunity and demonstrates a lack of determination.
Meanwhile we have seen the fire service waking up to inspect schools and other buildings. But without building codes being enforced we are only one spark away from a similar if not worse disaster, be it in a public building or one of the new private high rises that pockmark our urban landscape. The capacity of the fire service also has to be greatly expanded. It does not appear from looking at recent budget estimates that there has been any significant increase in staffing with employment costs largely static and capital expenditures insufficient ($376M in 2021). That is why the glib testimony to the COI by the former Home Affairs Permanent Secretary that her door was open to any requests for equipment sounded hollow. Mahdia did not have the right equipment, plain and simple.
It would appear this is a service that has been underfunded over the decades. For example there are still only two fire stations on the West Demerara despite the massive increases in households and communities in the past ten years. National budgets reflect the priorities of the government in office and it is hard not to conclude that the protection of homes and their occupants has not been paramount.
This is the 20th editorial by this publication on the Mahdia tragedy which is fitting – one for each of the victims of this 100% man-made and avoidable disaster.
It won’t be the last. If anything is to come out of this tragedy it is that the government must take the safety of its citizens more seriously. That starts by accepting responsibility for mistakes made. It starts with Mahdia.
