THE air is looking very unhealthy in some areas of the Klang Valley especially and the air pollutant index (API) verifies this. What the eyes see is a situation where the haze is close to the ground and visibility poor, indicating a serious situation. This near-seasonal annual affair is unpleasant because of its consequences to public health. Reportedly the heavy morning rains yesterday did little to ameliorate the situation. If it persists, those in the affected areas will come down with respiratory problems, with first the children and close on their heels, the elderly. Last year, the haze got so bad that schools had to be closed. That was the year when Singapore and Malaysia demanded that the Indonesians control their slash-and-burn problem.
Granted, the prolonged unseasonably hot weather is to blame then and now. Dry bushes are tinderboxes waiting to be lit, but what irked the Malaysian and Singaporean authorities was that companies were, under cover of this natural phenomenon, opening lands for plantations through dangerous slash-and-burn activities. Bilateral meetings ensued between Putrajaya and Jakarta and Singapore and Jakarta. The outcome of the diplomacy, which bordered on threats, was Indonesia’s long outstanding ratification of the Asean Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution and promises of tougher laws and their enforcement on its part. In Malaysia, meanwhile, the authorities were shamed into announcing that it would follow Singapore’s lead of using a more refined particulate reading and hence, more accurate; an important innovation because the pollutants comprise of some toxic elements. But disappointingly, the API readings given currently appear not to have changed. And, when downpours of some length do nothing to clear the air, the inference is that the pollution is bad and persistent. Obviously, the promises made by Jakarta has yet to materialise. One is left wondering, what is it that is making progress difficult for the Indonesian authorities? Indeed, the last time when even hills burnt, aid came from other countries, although it must be noted that they were initially hesitant to accept Malaysia’s offer of assistance. For Putrajaya, it was a matter of wanting to end the misery for Malaysians sooner rather than later and extending help seemed the logical solution.
But it is not about putting out massive fires every time a drought strikes. It is about preventing these fires. It should not matter that some years are drier than others. The goal must be to set up a standard procedure that can be launched immediately when a wildfire starts. In fact, it would be even better if residents are vigilant and fires are put out before they spread. Yes, prosecuting the corporate culprits is a must when they are proven guilty, but surely better prevention is more helpful. Mobilising the population in areas prone to brush and peat fires should be explored. Setting up equipped civilian fire-fighting corps for mobilisation during emergencies would extend the reach of fire brigades. The aim is to, as much as possible, stop fires before they become menacing.