A bridge to nowhere

So that's it? After extensive investigations, three deaths, families in shock, severely traumatised children and teachers, the best that has happened is to blacklist the bridge builder?

The campsite was one that was previously used by the Ministry of Education to hold its co-curriculum camp activities. This bridge was a new replacement.

The authorities have a duty of care towards the health and safety of children under their responsibility and in situations where there is an element of risk involved.

Had a risk assessment ever been carried out on the camping site? Was the staff to pupil ratio for this particular age-group and level of activity, adequate?

Had the teachers been given correct procedures and guidelines? Were any of them trained in first aid? What were the lines of responsibility? Had the legal requirements been considered?

It is all very well blaming the company now. But no company would have constructed the bridge, for nothing. A tender would have been put out, proposals called for and one company selected based on eligibility, class of contractor, cost and time taken to complete the project.

So whose signature is on the successful bid form, because someone from the education department would have been authorised to sign it on behalf of the ministry?

Someone too, would have signed the permit to work. That someone would have known the company was not eligible nor authorised.

And when the project was completed, who inspected the work, saw that it complied with all the requirements, certified that it was complete and then authorised payment? The paper trail should lead somewhere.

If it is claimed that the bridge was illegally built without submission of plans and the required planning application, then someone is not following procedure.

What happened to the system of checks and balances, and the various lines of authority needing authentication?

If however, a plan was submitted, and the required planning application was obtained, then why was the bridge not built according to plan? Was substandard material also utilised?

We are then told that the bridge was allowed to be used, even before it had been checked by the Perak Public Works Department. This is a serious breach of responsibility.

It was also alleged that a company had ‘contributed' the bridge to the campsite. How so? I am sure many isolated communities such as the Orang Asli would benefit greatly from the 'contribution' of a bridge to ease their lives.

But then, these communities have nothing much to offer in return, unlike the lucrative Education Ministry.

In the last company I worked for, even a cup of coffee had to be declared. Maybe, in this education department, the threshold value before a contractor's 'contribution' should be declared, is 'much' higher.

It was also alleged that the district education department director was himself unaware that the centre had gone ahead and built the bridge.

Does the right hand not know what the left hand is up to? The bridge, in reality, only managed to support a tenth of the recommended weight stipulation.

But we are given conflicting numbers of children on the bridge. At the initial taskforce inquiry, we are told it was 22 children. This exceeded the safety tolerance of the bridge and led to the collapse.

Ommisions and errors

However, the statement issued by the education director-general claimed only 15 children to be present. This is puzzling and the lines of enquiry placed undue emphasis on the concrete block connection.

But, what has NOT been mentioned is that some of the children were 'jumping and shaking' the bridge. This is important because you are subjecting the bridge and its foundation, to even greater forces.

This bridge may have been perfectly acceptable if used correctly. But NOT when children are jumping on it and when the optimal number of children is exceeded. Therefore, the bridge is not being used as how it should be intended.

We are told that with few teachers that night, the children were unsupervised. More children than should have been on the bridge crossed it that night and in a two-way traffic flow.

One would have thought that the children would be supervised at all times, day and night? Pupils should not be mollycoddled, but what happened to duty of care?

This suggests that the children were not told how to use this bridge properly - that is, do not jump, do not go in big groups and do not fool around on the bridge.

This will undoubtedly increase the motions and oscillations on the bridge. Were the children and teachers given proper procedures and guidelines?

The area was said to be in darkness. There was no mention of lifebelts on the riverbanks, or a bell or whistle or any warning device, so as to easily raise the alarm in such an incident as this.

We are also told that the Bomba (Fire and Rescue department) boats were not equipped with lights and had to use torch lights. A search-and-rescue such as this should have involved the TNB to provide emergency power and searchlights.

The co-ordination of the various services in an emergency disaster situation seem poorly planned, equipped and organised.

When the Women, Family and Community Development Minister Shahrizat Abdul Jalil spoke to reporters during a visit to the site, she said that "...safety aspects should be given priority when organising activities involving children".

Is she implying that currently, this is not being practised? Or is she implying that when adults are involved, the emphasis on safety can be reduced?

I am also disturbed by the comments of the MACC chief who said that they were "...ready to investigate if there was any element of wrongdoing".

I bow to the superior knowledge of the MACC who seems very informed on how government circles work. It appears that corruption is so rife that even the MACC is ready and waiting in the wings, to act swiftly. What a sad but telling reflection of Malaysia.

This camp trip was supposed to foster racial harmony. To me, there are better places and longer-term opportunities to learn about racial/social unity than in a short four-day camping trip.

It is apparent that in this camp, there has been little preparation, poor organisation and a distinct lack of emergency contingency plans as well as an inadequacy of the search-and-rescue teams.

Nevertheless, I am a firm believer that school trips and the outdoors have much to offer children in the way of personal development. It would be a shame if parents were reluctant to send their children on these trips because of a failure on the part of the authorities.

Sympathies may have been expressed all round but what about criminal charges, compensation, apology and accountability? Who is accountable for the various lapses in procedures, and the inadequate preparations and emergency planning.

There is a clear distinction to be made between blaming people for the disaster and blaming them for being ill-prepared.

Hopefully there will be valuable lessons to be learnt from this tragedy. We owe it to the memory of the three girls who died and also to their families.

MARIAM MOKHTAR is a non-conformist traditionalist from Perak, a bucket chemist and an armchair eco-warrior. In 'real-speak', this translates into that she comes from Ipoh, values change but respects culture, is a petroleum chemist and also an environmental pollution-control scientist.