It is going to be a difficult job for the Uttarakhand Government to fully compensate for the losses suffered by the victims of the cloudbursts and floods, rehabilitate them, and rebuild the destroyed public infrastructure. In addition, it has become imperative for an ‘audit’ to be conducted across the state to identify all places where homes, markets, resorts, etc., have been built in violation of safety norms. Following this, corrective action will have to be taken so that future disasters can be averted. Considering that there will be resistance at many places to such action by vested interests, the policy adopted will have to be accommodative of such concerns. It may cost much more than anticipated but it will be fruitful in the long run.
There will also have to be a clear distinction between the situation in the hills and that in the plains. In most cases in the hills, the common people have not had many choices available as the surrounding environment has deteriorated because of reasons outside their control. However, in the plains, it has been mostly deliberate encroachment, often encouraged by politicians to build a vote bank. The alternatives to be provided must be based on these realities.
With regard to development of the necessary infrastructure in the state, the traditional pattern of design and construction should be upgraded to the highest level of technology available at the present, no matter what the cost. India’s best institutions and experts should be consulted so that the engineering serves its purpose. There is a strong vested interest in following the traditional pattern because of the established kickback culture, which not only leads to inflated prices but also poor-quality implementation of the actual works. At least for the more crucial projects, the standards should be changed so that only the best, highly reputed companies are given the responsibility.
Rehabilitation, even if the funding is available, will be another challenge because there is shortage of suitable land in this mountainous state. There are examples of successful housing projects established by government agencies, such as the MDDA, and these can be replicated without compromising on quality or planning. Along with this, as has been already mentioned many times already, the regulatory regime will not only have to be strengthened and updated, but also cleansed of the deeply embedded corruption. Those put in charge should not only be capable and honest but also given a free hand in the implementation. Only then will there be hope for the future.
