Facebook Twitter Google Plus Vimeo Youtube Feed Feedburner

ROS LBoard 1

Conflicting advise and decisions on haze

June 26, 2013

FMT LETTER: From Nirmala A, via e-mail

One wonders if the higher authorities understand the process of decision-making. If they truly do, could someone kindly explain why would there be a decision to close down schools on Monday when the API is in the unhealthy zone of 100-150 (Sunday evening) but when the following day API’s rose to 190++ (Monday evening) and 229 (Monday night) entering the very unhealthy zone, they decide to reopen schools on Tuesday. This is what is happening in my area, Petaling Jaya.

To rub salt into the wound, parents are told they have the discretion to not send their kids to school if they think that the situation is too detrimental to their kids health. What more does an API reading of unhealthy – very healthy tell you? Can’t they just make the simple decision of shutting down schools?

Why wait until the API reaches the hazardous zone of above 300 before shutting down schools? Are we waiting for students to fall sick before sensible action is taken?

As the air we breathe gets more toxic, we are advised to stay indoors and if we were to go out, we should wear face masks. If that were the case, why are schools open instead of students being asked to stay home. Conflicting advise, conflicting decisions.

I would love to see one or two or more of the higher authorities come down to the school and spend 5-6 hours in the smog and polluted air “concentrating” and “studying”. Let them breathe in unhealthy and very unhealthy air for 5-6 hours and then let’s see what decision they make next.


Readers are required to have a valid Facebook account to comment on this story. We welcome your opinions to allow a healthy debate. We want our readers to be responsible while commenting and to consider how their views could be received by others. Please be polite and do not use swear words or crude or sexual language or defamatory words. FMT also holds the right to remove comments that violate the letter or spirit of the general commenting rules.

The views expressed in the contents are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of FMT.