Constructive blame

In a crisis, the blame game becomes the norm. The latest spate of bad weather has left the country reeling and authorities are looking for scapegoats to take the rap. Is it really fair to blame the Meteorological Department for failing to announce the bad weather or is it the lack of a holistic approach to handling natural disasters in Sri Lanka?

When one thinks of natural disasters, the 2004 tsunami springs to mind. It was not only horrific in the cost of lives but also in the recovery process that took years and much strife to complete. Even today there are tsunami-affected areas that need assistance as poverty was not wiped out by the tsunami – if anything it was strengthened.

Nine years on, the time has come to look back and see how well Sri Lanka’s disaster management mechanisms have developed. True, there are tsunami warning systems in place and drills carried out to ensure that the people are warned of a pending disaster. There are Disaster Management Centres countrywide, but whether they are adequately funded and trained can only be tested in a pressurised situation.

True, a Metrological Department warning could have given the crucial timeframe for disaster services to prepare themselves and put Army and Navy people in action to minimise harm. Most of the missing is fishermen and they are feared dead since the warning did not go out in time to prevent them from setting off to earn their daily bread. The same happened in November 2011 and we see an almost identical repeat two years later.

However, the distribution of food and water, providing shelter and deploying personnel are the other, more important, conduits of a competent disaster management system. What about the Navy and Army being deployed as soon as the weather situation was known? This is all the more imperative as they could have done more in rescuing people and minimizing damage.

The value of a disaster management team is in how fast they respond in an emergency situation. The Meteorological Department need to understand that they were at fault in not issuing a warning sooner, that cannot be denied and perhaps they have relevant reasons but the fact remains that Sri Lanka’s disaster management mechanism still needs fine tuning. Investment in the latest technology and equipment would not go amiss either.

Moreover, looking at long term needs, the thousands of houses that have been damaged or destroyed in the weather need to be rebuilt. There must be adequate monetary and physical support given to families during this period. The process must be transparent and free from corruption and it must assist communities to recover.

There is also a grave need for volunteers to help during disaster management and mechanisms for them to do so. One of the most heartening developments during the recent Japanese earthquake was that hordes of people volunteered to help clean up and assist the victims to return to their normal lives as soon as possible – empathy that needs to be more consistent in Sri Lanka.

In short Sri Lanka needs to change its attitude towards natural disasters and feel more than it just being an inconvenience. Natural disasters can have real impact on an economy and this is exactly why more attention needs to be paid to climate change as well as disaster management. The important thing is to consistently support these people by taking quick and efficient action. The blame game does not help anyone.