Reactive, or Prioritising?

One week ago, 58 people died when a Shanghai apartment building caught fire. The cause of the fire was shoddy renovation work being carried out by unlicensed workers, but the wider consequence of the fire has been immediate:

• My apartment building has suddenly got fire prevention and fire emergency posters highlighting the precautions to avoid fires and the emergency actions to deal with the discovery of a fire
  

• My office building now has smart new signs to show the locations of the fire extinguishers and fire evacuation lighting is being installed
  

A cynic might say that this is another example of China's reactionary government which tends to only take a problem seriously once it has made headlines (SARS, Baby Milk, Food Standards, Coal Mine disasters, etc).

But a more sympathetic view is that China has SO many things to fix, and SO many things on its "to do" list that it really can't win.

China's airports, China's railways, China's urban planning are all as good as anywhere in the world (and arguably the best). China is clearly focussing its considerable efforts and cash reserves on initiatives and projects that regenerate, create future wealth potential and catch up with the basic structural infrastructure that the developed economies built over 100 years ago.

So having pondered on this, I am of the view that this terrible tragedy is probably more a victim of the latter than the former. However, as China matures it needs to realise that the country's "software" needs to catch up with the "hardware"...and this starts at school. Only a fundamental reassessment of what is taught, and how it is taught, in Chinese schools will start the sea change of social responsibility and accountability that this country needs so badly. Common sense curriculum items such as fire prevention, road safety and sex education (all seemingly absent currently) would be a good start.

Will it happen? Maybe one day. But sadly not as quickly as the time it takes to build another new airport.