I AM writing to express my, and many others', anger towards the Social Welfare Department's irresponsible and inexcusable neglect of the elderly during the recent cold snap.
During the first few days of this Lunar New Year we experienced the lowest temperatures in recent years. So far, it has been reported that at least 40 people have died in the near-freezing weather.
Immediately, angry fingers were pointed at the Department. Let's listen to its excuse: 'We were informed that there would be a drop in temperature, so we distributed 400 blankets on February 18.' And I heard the head of the Department say on TV: 'I regret very much that several old people have died but I would like to clarify that most of them weren't street sleepers but were under their own shelter.' By this he meant they were not the Department's responsibility.
It is astonishing and embarrassing to be told that in Hong Kong, one of the most developed and civilised cities in the world, so many people died in temperatures that were not so low.
Recently in the eastern United States, the temperatures fell to several tens of degrees below zero, but the number of people who died was hardly greater than here. Even more surprising is the Department's claim that it was not its responsibility or fault.
I doubt this very much. Is my English too poor to interpret correctly the meaning of 'social welfare'? Doesn't that mean the welfare of the entire community? If that meaning is right, why didn't our 'Social Welfare' Department provide essential aid to our senior citizens when they most needed it? Or is the Department only committed to catering for the welfare of street sleepers? At the same time, the Department was spending $600,000 on holding feasts to celebrate the Lunar New Year in 19 districts. When asked if they felt it ironic, senior officers replied that such a small amount would not have helped the needy old very much. Besides, it was 'necessary' for the Department to boost co-operation between itself and local leaders.
