Money before lives
Thailand: Tsunami warning suppressed to protect tourism
This was a front-page article in a Thai newspaper, The Nation, on Dec 28.
Excerpt:
"The very important factor in making the decision (whether to issue a tsunami warning) was that it's high [tourist] season and hotel rooms were nearly 100-per-cent full. If we issued a warning, which would have led to evacuation, [and if nothing happened], what would happen then? Business would be instantaneously affected."
Words fail me. I wonder how the people at that meeting are feeling right now, looking out on the scene of devastation in their country. Are they plagued by "what if"s? And what happened to "better be safe than sorry"?
Makes you feel impotently angry that the damage could have so easily been averted or at least lessened. Needless loss of life.
Scottish newspaper The Scotsman carried a follow-up report:
Thailand's Meteorological Department may have delayed sounding a tidal wave warning for fear it could damage the country's lucrative tourism industry, officials indicated today.Sulamee Prachuab, who heads the department's Seismological Bureau, said the agency needed to be cautious because the government's tourism agency deems that such warnings would hurt tourism if a predicted natural disaster didn稚 occur.
[...]
"Five years ago, the Meteorological Department issued a warning of a possible tidal wave after an earthquake occurred in Papua New Guinea, but the tourism authority complained that such a warning would hurt tourism," Sumalee said.
As usual, the government's going to set up a "fact-finding committee" and "investigate the handling of the situation". Sigh.