Disaster Management (Amendment) Bill 2024
Context:
Recently, the central government introduced the Disaster Management (Amendment) Bill in the Lok Sabha.
Key Amendments
- Preparation of Disaster Management Plans: Shifts the responsibility for preparing national and state disaster management plans from the National Executive Committee and State Executive Committee to NDMA and SDMA.
- Expanded Functions of NDMA and SDMA:
-
-
- Periodic risk assessment, including emerging climate risks.
- Technical assistance to lower authorities.
- Guidelines for minimum relief standards.
- Creation of national and state disaster databases.
-
- Urban Disaster Management Authorities: State governments can now establish Urban Disaster Management Authorities for state capitals and cities with municipal corporations, with the Municipal Commissioner as chairperson.
- State Disaster Response Force (SDRF): Empowers state governments to create SDRF, defining its functions and terms of service.
- Statutory Status to Committees: Grants statutory status to the National Crisis Management Committee (NCMC) and High Level Committee (HLC) for disaster response and financial assistance.
- NDMA Appointments: NDMA is now empowered to determine the number and category of officers and consultants, subject to central government approval.
Disaster Management (Amendment) Bill, 2024 loopholes:
- Centralisation Concerns: The Bill further centralises an already centralised Disaster Management Act, 2005, complicating the disaster response chain by providing statutory status to pre-existing committees like National Crisis Management Committee, potentially delaying disaster responses.
Changes and Adaptations Made Under the Disaster Management Act During COVID-19
- Creation of Multiple Authorities: The introduction of Urban Disaster Management Authorities (UDMAs) for state capitals and large cities adds another layer of authority, potentially complicating the disaster management framework.
- Financial Decentralisation Issues: Despite decentralising functions, the Bill fails to devolve necessary financial resources, creating new challenges.
- Restricted Definition of ‘Disaster’
- Exclusion of Heatwaves: The government’s refusal to classify heatwaves as notified disasters contrasts with global consensus and overlooks the increasing threat of heatwaves in India, as evidenced by rising heatwave days and related fatalities.
- Static Disaster Definition: The current and proposed definitions in the Act are too restricted, failing to account for regional variability and the evolving nature of climate-induced disasters.
Grievances of State Governments Regarding the Disaster Management Act, 2005
- Centralization of Power:
- States feel their autonomy is undermined by the NDMA’s centralised control, limiting their ability to tailor disaster management to local needs (e.g., during COVID-19).
- Lack of Provisions for Disaster-Prone Zones:
- The Act does not identify disaster-prone zones, hindering states like Uttarakhand and Odisha from taking proactive measures.
- Overlapping Functions:
- Multiple bodies under the Act cause confusion and inefficiencies in disaster response, complicating coordination between NDMA, SDMAs, and DDMAs.
- Limited Financial Autonomy:
- States depend on central funds (e.g., NDRF), facing delays and insufficient allocations during disasters.
- Neglect of Progressive Disasters:
- The Act focuses on sudden disasters, lacking provisions for ongoing crises like epidemics and environmental degradation.
- Inadequate Local Representation:
- Local authorities, crucial first responders, have minimal guidance and representation, limiting their effectiveness in emergencies.
