PEOPLE who were made uncomfortable by Bishop Howard Gregory’s comments on Sunday, and which were reported in yesterday’s edition of the Daily Observer, would probably describe them as alarmist.

We, however, cannot share that view, as we believe the bishop is spot on in his observation that if politicians continue to play politics by refusing to relocate settlements located along gully banks, the country will likely experience disaster.

It was most fitting for Bishop Gregory to make these comments at a church service to mark the start of Disaster Preparedness Month.

The sad reality of what he said, though, is that this problem has been acknowledged by successive governments, but they have failed to do anything about it for the very reason that the bishop pointed out on Sunday — people living in these gullybank communities represent significant pockets of votes.

It is a point we have raised repeatedly in these columns, especially after the passage of Tropical Storm Gustav in August 2008.

Readers will remember that Gustav’s flood waters swallowed several houses built on the banks of the Hope River in St Andrew.

That area was declared a ‘no-build zone’ some years before, but was allowed to grow into a large informal settlement.

At the time, Prime Minister Bruce Golding forcefully declared at a press briefing: “We are not allowing one more block to be laid along the Hope River.”

The Government, he vowed, would take firm action to prevent any further construction along the river.

Mr Golding went as far as to set up a task force to define the ‘no-build’ boundary and to institute measures to monitor the area to prevent any further construction.

The task force was also asked to identify persons occupying lands beyond the ‘no-build’ line and pinpoint alternative lands for their relocation, beginning with those whose houses which were in the greatest danger.

Three years later, we reported then Senator Desmond McKenzie pleading with his colleagues in the Upper House to fast-track a ‘no-build zone’ legislation, which includes the mandatory evacuation of danger zones during natural disasters.

The timeline here suggests that our legislators see no need for urgency on this matter, which reinforces Bishop Gregory’s point that politicians value the people living in these high-risk areas more for their votes than anything else.

For what else could explain this lethargy in ensuring that Jamaican citizens are not allowed to build in danger zones?

We are now in the 2012 hurricane season and with it comes the possibility of our being affected by storms or other weather systems that will bring heavy rains.

Whenever the country is hit by a storm, the loss of human life, even if it’s one, is painful. In addition, the recovery cost is expensive. In fact, Mr McKenzie, in that appeal to the Senate in 2011, pointed out that natural disasters had cost Jamaica $100 billion over the last 20 years.

That’s a lot of money for a country drowning in debt and with pressing needs for greater spend on health, education, security, and vital infrastructure.

Dare we hope that the politicians from both major political parties, who were in the congregation on Sunday when Bishop Gregory spoke, will feel some amount of guilt and act on his words?