Comments on: King Orders Investigation into Jeddah Floods

By: Chiara

Chiara — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 14:45:35 +0000

I would agree with building the infrastructure where it is lacking, ie in existing cities. The character, history and the advantages of the current cities (eg natural ports) cannot be established readily elsewhere. New economic cities should learn from past mistakes but should not preclude building infrastructures for safety and health in the existing ones.

The 1st world economy with a 3rd world reality is sadly too common. In former colonies it is called having the new owners create an oligarchy with a deliberate dramatic disparity of wealth beween them and “the peasants”.

By: Talal

Talal — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 06:27:36 +0000

While I do agree with the notion that we should “spread out” a bit (God knows we have the space), I would like to see the basic infrastructure of our current cities upgraded to a point where it functions as it should.

I mean we live in one of the world’s richest developing countries. We have 1st world class cities with the an infrastructure that is not even up to par with some of our less well off (financially) contemporaries.

Now, building new cities is a brave endeavor. As I would have liked to see us invest more in our existing towns and villages to help them grow and absorb more of this migration. But I think that spending SAR 100B to build a new city while the existing ones are falling apart is an extravagance we cannot afford.

I understand how tempting it is to try and mimic the Dubai model when looking at KAEC and the other new cities, however, a more mature (prudent) way to go is to encourage organic growth of the current cities, towns and villages by improving the infrastructure, spreading the investment and generating jobs in more places (existing) to ease the urban migration.

Give a little more love to the places that are not in the Riyadh, Makkah, and Eastern Province.

By: John Burgess

John Burgess — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 03:17:10 +0000

Khalid,

Welcome!

I think they should build a new suburb with the money in a higher land

Isn’t this what the new ‘economic cities’ are supposed to be doing? If not higher ground, at least less populated ground.

I think a serious amount of money needs to be spent on the infrastructure of existing cities, though, because they didn’t really get it right the first time. That’s going to make it far more expensive and annoy a lot more people. But we really can’t have Jeddah washing away every time there’s an inordinate amount of rain, either. Less than 10cm of rain killed over 100 and caused billions of riyals of damage. If that happens only once every ten years, that still 100 people and billions of riyals, every decade.

By: Khalid

Khalid — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 01:41:55 +0000

Hello to all. What Talal said makes a lot of sense and i think the King made a very good decision. I think it’s about time that the mess caused by corruption and bad management is stopped. However, I don’t think people should over-react. Honestly, it’s not worth while to be spending most of what you got on protecting yourself if you are not being shot at. It’s clear that this rain was bad, but even clearer that it does NOT happen often enough to cause the government to spend so much of the available resources on flood-control. As a matter of fact, I think they should build a new suburb with the money in a higher land. We are facing a potential population explosion and the planners should work on plans to make the big cities less attractive to live, study, or work in. They are already suffering from trafic jams, water shortages, and bad expansion plans.

By: John Burgess

John Burgess — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 17:37:38 +0000

That’s good to learn. Thanks.

By: Talal

Talal — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 16:44:07 +0000

This is part of the Royal Decree issued by King Abdullah :

– ????? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ??? ?????? ??????? ? ???? ?? ??? ????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ??????? ?????? ???? ????? ? ???? ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ????? ???????? ?? ?????? ?????? ??????? ? ??? ?? ??? ????? ???? ?? ????? ???? ?? ??????? ??????? ?????? .

Which roughly translates to:

The Committee has the option to form sub-committees to ease it’s job. And all government agencies are required to cooperate fully with the committee and sub-committees.

and:

– ??? ?????? ????? ????? ??? – ????? – ?? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ???? ? ?????? ???? ??????? ?? ??? ?? ????? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ? ?? ??????? – ??? ???????? – ? ??? ????? ????????? ??? ???? ?? ??? ???????? ??????? .

Which roughly translates to:

The committee is to let us (King Abdullah) know if any government agency if does not cooperate. And the committee has the right to bring in any person required to give information or for questioning – when needed. And the committee has the right to utilize any specialists required to complete the investigation.

Now, to what I’m trying to get to is that the CIP would generally be the body to carry-out the forensic accounting but should the committee decide to bring in more specialists, it may do so, as per the Royal Decree.

In essence, the committee is the “higher management”. It won’t be doing the leg work. That’s what the sub-committees will be for and they will be formed by the committee.

By: Sparky

Sparky — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 14:02:48 +0000

Good write-up…Very good write-up!

Most of all good recommendations!

By: anonymous

anonymous — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 13:01:13 +0000

“I don’t find a forensic economist on the list, someone to track the money intended for flood mitigation and control, and the overall Jeddah sewage and drainage system. Did the moneys allocated for that go where they were supposed to go? Nor do I see any Civil Engineers listed. There was a physical failure of systems, not unlike the failure of flood control in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina. And what about Geologists, Hydrologists, or even Cartographers?”

Well put. Very well put. Very very well put!

Also: There are so far three comparisons to Katrina (besides yours) that I’ve found. The Christian Science Monitor and this AN editorial, which refers to a third one from an Al-Watan columnist.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/1130/p06s13-wome.html

http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7&section=0&article=128967&d=1&m=12&y=2009&pix=opinion.jpg&category=Opinion

Also, like in Katrina (and Musk Lake) crap runs downhill. While it’s easy to place very justifiable blame on the Baladiyya — national officials are greatly responsible for Jeddah flood control, must like the Corps of Engineers share mucho blame for the failure of the levees in New Orleans.

It’s going to be easy to send the mayor to the pillar (and I think the head of the Civil Defense was sacked yesterday) — what will not be easy to answer is what role the the Ministry of Public Works played in this. And (foreign and domestic) contractors, too — we can’t take their accusations for face value; they have a vested role in ensuring no blame is laid on their planning and proposals and it’s easy to pass the buck to local political corruption and their poor planning. It’s no secret that foreign contractors often sell sizzles to the Saudis who trust them too much.