In my article ‘The National Disaster Management Office is a disaster’ (Sunday Standard 27 April to 3 May 2008), I sought to present an impassioned plea to the relevant authorities to commence a deliberate process of educating, conscientizing and mobilizing communities about the possibilities for bushfire outbreaks.
Unfortunately, instead of focusing on the task ahead (the bigger picture) the National Disaster Management Office (NDMO) through its overzealous Public Relations Officer elected to focus on what they described as my ‘fundamental ignorance’ about the responsibility of the office as well as (my) ‘small talent for hurling unfettered insults at the Office of the President’. The NDMO has no business in defending or protecting the Office of the President rather they should have confined themselves to criticism directed at them and conceptualized workable strategies to prevent bushfires.
Running away from responsibility is the equivalent of criminal negligence.
In my essay ‘Criticism not the same as Pull Him Down Syndrome’ Sunday Standard, 11-17 May 2008, I opined that public debates ‘permit us to share knowledge and thoughts however weird and booby. It is also a truism that discussions also help us to share ignorance and where possible, to put things right through the acquisition of new knowledge’. I am glad my fundamental ignorance about the role and responsibility of the NDMO has been righted. However, my complimentary remarks about the NDMO extend only to righting my fundamental ignorance, thus assisting me to acquire knowledge relating to the office responsible for the management of bush land. Bravo disaster people!
The larger part of the response to my article insinuated that the lead agency in micro-managing the handling of veld fires was more than prepared. Part of the response stated that ‘the lead agency in wild-land management has put in place several measures as a preparedness way to deal with the anticipated wild-land fire season’. The recent devastating fires that are encircling the country have without doubt contradicted the assurance given to the public. This is not to claim that full preparedness would have translated into a zero chance of bushfires but rather that if the process had been holistic in terms of encompassing resource mobilization such as necessary and available equipment and technology and stakeholders such as the Botswana Defense Force, the Police, rural communities and other institutions, the situation couldn’t have been as catastrophic as it is now.
I have also pointed out that our readiness for emergencies of every kind and post disaster rehabilitation is mediocre but the insinuation from the response to my article was that the necessary pieces were in place and other role players such as NGOs, CBOs and other government departments have been mobilized. It is clear that the NDMO intentionally opted to use the language of partnerships to obscure their hopelessness. The public was assured that the authorities are operating a GIS-based fire detection system which provides information on active fires and facilitates rapid fire suppression activities. Recent fires challenge the validity of this assurance and or the effectiveness and efficiency of this fire detection system since most recent fires seem to have been noticed after massive damage has been done and in some cases long after the fires started. It is possible that in their endeavor to rebut my article, the authorities went over board and outlined hypothetical measures rather than tangible measures already in place. If this was the case, the nation has been misled, deliberately so, with catastrophic consequences. A valuable opportunity may have been lost as the authorities elected to answer for the Office of the President and brag about being ‘busy preparing Botswana to meet the challenge of wild-land fires’, when they knew very well that they have very little to offer owing to their lack of capacity and under-resourcefulness.
Overall, it would appear that the nation was deliberately misled into believing that the relevant authorities were adequately prepared for the bushfires. In fact the response was that there is nothing alarming about the possibilities for bushfire outbreaks. This has the potential to compromise efforts of other willing role players such as NGOs and CBOs, especially in taking the initiative to prepare the country for veld fires. It also has the potential to malign stakeholders especially villagers who may have sincerely believed that their government would protect them and their property from fires.
It is also possible that there never any concerted efforts by the lead agency to mobilize other government departments which could be explained by the overall lackluster response to recent fires. Commenting on the bushfires that killed two women in the areas around Paje village recently, the Serowe Police chief revealed, with shock and apprehension, the insufficient firebreaks that are currently maintained. A key stakeholder! It is telling. Worse still, these limited firebreaks are not renewed regularly which means that it is possible they no longer exist.
As a result, the country is now on the verge of another cruel drought and famine resulting from loss of vegetation, livestock, wild animals, wild fruits and immovable property through veld fires. Loss of human life has been reported and reports are that cattle posts and villages risk being displaced. Our hopes for a better future have vanished in spite of having above average rainfall in the past rain season. While zero chances of bushfires are naturally discounted, it is certainly true that with a more proactive approach to disaster management which encompasses pre-disaster and risk reduction, many of these vicious fires could have been avoided. Full preparedness and improved capacity among role players through effective mobilization for prevention and mitigation of bushfires could have saved the situation or at least reduced the extent of the damage.
It is also a pity that despite my call for the civil society to play a prominent role in the light of reluctance on the part of the relevant government lead agency, they have remained motionless and disinterested. This attitude by NGOs does not justify their regaled partnership with the government on matters of development let alone continued government financial support. If they cannot help at the time they are needed most, they are as good as dead and one may suggest that if they continue to remain so aloof government and international donors should withhold their funding until some of these NGOs and CBOs overcome their inertia and show seriousness and a keen interest in issues of national concern. One would expect them to be more innovative, proactive and resilient and take their activities beyond litter picking or soliciting tattered clothing for the less privileged.
Our political leadership must also be taken to task for being silent on things that really matter. It is regrettable that the political leaders allowed issues of national importance to become residual to party politics, particularly primary elections. Instead of mobilizing people to help put off the fires, they trucked them to polling stations. Mr. President we need your urgent intervention of the same level with your determination to root out alcohol abuse.
Since no one is prepared to take responsibility for this ineptitude, it is suggested that the government institute a full and thorough investigation to determine any possibilities for negligence on the part of the lead agency in the management of wild-land and or any other player. The investigation should also determine the capacity of the agency to handle bushfires and the country’s overall preparedness for bushfires and emergencies in general. It should also determine the common causes of bushfires, the extent of the damage caused by recent bushfires and other relevant considerations that could help us prevent and or mitigate disasters in the future. This approach will help the country to draw up a holistic bushfires’ prevention and mitigation strategy.
