Word of thanks needed for bird flu workers
I agree that the most important issue at stake with bird flu is the protection of the Hong Kong people from the disease.
It is also imperative that the rest of the world be protected against its spread. And I agree that there is no choice but to mobilise resources as quickly as possible to see that everything possible is done to prevent any further deaths and spreading of the disease.
But what I find hard to understand is the indifferent response towards those who have gone above and beyond the call of duty to try to protect the Hong Kong people.
I shall try not to over-dramatise but I feel it worth stating a few salient points: None of the 1,200 Agriculture and Fisheries Department workers who risked exposure to this little-understood disease were obligated by contracts to expose themselves to the risks involved in the slaughter; neither were they employed for killing animals.
They nevertheless spent many sleepless nights without complaint, trying to expedite this dangerous and unpleasant task as far as the severely stretched resources would allow.
Those who criticise the rapid culling might well reflect on the current situation: we know little about the disease, and it has already claimed a significant number of lives. The longer such action is postponed, the greater the problem of smuggled chickens. With each passing day more and more potentially lethal chickens would have been brought in to cash in on the compensation offer.
How much longer would these critics have liked to debate the issue before deciding on such action? Such a delay would only have added to the workload and exposure risk to the Agriculture and Fisheries workers and the public.
We would all like the problem to go away as though it never existed. Of course the clean-up operation was not flawless, but let us put things into context. The containment and eradication of any new form of disease is extremely complex, and often imperfect.
The Director of Agriculture and Fisheries had the courage to acknowledge the problem, took responsibility and made an effort to deal with it. Why would any fair-minded person ask such an official to resign? Am I suggesting that everything went perfectly? No, but let's put it in perspective.
As the father of one of the employees in the Agriculture and Fisheries Department, perhaps I am biased. Still, I remember a time when a simple thank you for help in times of crisis was permissible.
NAME AND ADDRESS SUPPLIED
