States disaster management plans in disarray …………Our Bureau PUNE
THE states disaster management (DM) implementation is itself a big disaster. In the 18 months since its inception, the state disaster management authority (SDMA) has held only three meetings, of which two were routine pre-monsoon preparations in Mumbai. It did not submit a single report to the state legislature as required by law. The state government, too, is yet to find time to frame rules under the Disaster Management Act.
These were revealed after an NGO sought information under the Right to Information Act (RTI). The resources and livelihood group of Pune-based NGO Prayas reviewed the DM administration in the state from 2005 to 2008 under RTI.
In 2005, floods claimed over 1,100 lives across the state. Three years later, the danger of a drought has been looming large. Even today, the main target area of SDMA, established under the leadership of the chief minister, is Mumbai.
The state executive authority, established under the chief secretary to implement decisions taken by SDMA, held just one meeting that focused on the lessons of the 2005 flood, Prayas research associate Sachin Warghade said at a press conference recently.
After the 2005 floods, the state government had identified 70 villages in need of permanent rehabilitation since they suffer frequent floods. But the process has not even started in 65 villages, Mr Warghade stated.
The Comptroller and Auditor General has pointed out serious irregularities in the DM work carried out in the state after the 2005 floods. However, an RTI application by Prayas to the Anti-Corruption Bureau has exposed the states lack of action in this matter.
According to the DM Act, it is mandatory for each state and district to have a separate DM plan. After the 1993 Latur earthquake, which claimed nearly 10,000 lives, the state prepared its first DM plan in 1998 with the help of the World Bank. But it took another seven years for the state to update it. Two years after the 2005 floods, the state handed over the responsibility of updating the 1998 DM plans to its training arm, Yashada.
However, the SDMA has not issued any guidelines for preparing the district DM plans; neither has the state government made financial allocations for the district administration to implement the plans.
Prayas had asked for DM information under RTI from 33 districts, of which only 16 replied. Some districts even tried to mislead us. Five districts replied that they had updated their DM plans, said Mr Warghade. The situation at the district level regarding meetings and reports is worse than that at state level.
The NGO found that the institutional structure of DM at the taluka and village levels exists only on paper. Only Kolhapur faired well on most parameters.