THE PRIME Minister has spelled out a billion-dollar bill for restoring public infrastructure damaged in two weeks of May rains. This estimate does not cover damage to the agricultural sector and would not, of course, include personal costs of damage to private property. There have been flooding and damage to houses and their contents even in officially established housing schemes where people have contracted millions of dollars of mortgage debt to acquire property exposed to excessive risk of flood damage.
The damage simply has to be fixed. But how much of it could have been prevented and minimised by sensible forward-planning, appropriate regulation and reasonable expenditure on prevention? The island is not a stranger to heavy rains, particularly at this time of year. Our geography of a mountainous interior with rivers flowing on to coastal plains virtually dictates recurring flooding on the plains and land slippage in the mountains. What has really been unusual in recent years is the absence of sustained May rains.
The ODPEM has had to deal with several of the same persons repeatedly in shelters and the leadership of the agency has become understandably quite frustrated with the task of repetitive relief without correction. While heavy rainfall and even flooding may be natural phenomena, their human impact is often exacerbated, perhaps even caused by unwise human action.
Several agencies carry responsibilities for the care and use of the natural environment. The NEPA has overall responsibility for the environment and land use planning. Parish Councils are responsible for building permits and garbage collection and disposal. The Ministries of Environment and Housing, Works, and Agriculture and their respective agencies also have responsibilities. It is past time for these agencies to take the necessary pre-emptive steps, by Prime Ministerial directive if necessary, to reduce damage from natural events which do not have to be disasters, certainly from rains which are not particularly unusual. Hazard mapping has been extensively done but largely ignored, as geologist Rafi Ahmad has reminded in a Sunday Gleaner contribution on reducing vulnerability from landslides and flooding.
As Mr. Seaga has pointed out, Kingston is largely spared flooding because of the massive gully control programme of the 1960s. Since the 1930s, the East Coast of the United States has seen dramatic reduction in property damage and loss of life from hurricanes because of improved forecasting and preventive measures in construction and development. We are beneficiaries of the US hurricane forecasting system from the centre in Miami. If money has to be found and can be found frequently for rehabilitation on an unnecessarily large scale, then let some money be found for sensible preventive action now. Prevention is always better than cure.
