South Africa’s Disaster Management Act of 2002 and the National Disaster Management framework is world-leading legislation, but incompetent application renders it almost worthless to the agricultural sector, which should be its primary beneficiary, says an advisor to Agri SA and author of the legislation Koos van Zyl.
Basically we’re stuck with a Rolls Royce without petrol. The Disaster Management Act of 2002 aimed to change government’s response to disasters from a reactive approach to a proactive one. This approach is encapsulated in the principles of risk assessment and then risk reduction, followed by mitigation and finally response and recovery. Many natural disasters in South Africa could have been averted by risk assessment and subsequent preventative action, at a fraction of the eventual response and recovery costs.
According to the Act, when an incident such as a flood, drought or fire takes place and it’s outside the local community’s ability to control it, either local authorities, or provincial or national government must declare a disaster. This activates the required response to the situation, whether it’s reduction or recovery, as stipulated by the Act. There are great benefits for a community if a disaster area is declared, as a structure is created where the principles and aims of the Act must be pursued.
We currently see government reacting on an ad hoc basis to disaster. This is not in line with the Act or the Disaster Risk Management framework, which describes everything that needs to be done in great detail. Aid in the form of food parcels and housing is often supplied without following the correct procedure of first declaring a disaster area. The other prerequisites described in the Act, regarding issues such as assessment and reduction, are also ignored. One of the main objectives of the Act is to ensure the authorities respond in a predictable and fair manner to communities struck by natural disasters.
Ad hoc measures, financed from discretionary funds, do the exact opposite as nobody knows what to expect. Aid efforts are left open for political exploitation. For example, food parcels get hijacked for political campaigning and apparently in the case of the De Doorns flood, the area has still not been declared a disaster area, or covered by government funding even though the flooding took place at the end of last year.
Drought and flood situations are often addressed through the Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act of 1983 (CARA), without regard for the appropriate Disaster Management Act of 2002.
A recent example was the Eastern Cape Department of Agriculture’s response to the drought in the province. In a media statement, the department only focused on livestock issues as prescribed in CARA, with only a reference to the Disaster Management Act. The only conclusion to be made is a lack of will prevents the proper legislation from being implemented. Disaster assessments are hard work, take too long, and the flow of funds to those in dire need is much too slow. Treasury controls the National Contingency Fund of about R2 billion. Treasury doesn’t want to divide the funds between different departments, preferring central management for better financial control. Good communication is thus essential to access the money.
The Act assumes good communication from all roleplayers, starting at local municipal level through provincial government and up to national government. This isn’t happening and government officials are to blame.
And while the Act isn’t being fully implemented, disaster relief is financed from discretionary funds, with the understanding that if provincial governments have extra money, they should use it upfront. National Treasury, with the proper motivation, would refund them when provincial budgets are finalised, normally in April and November.
But past experience shows no province has extra money lying around and, due to inefficiency, can’t even spend money budgeted, let alone spend it on unexpected natural disasters. The R300 million disaster relief funding applied for in 2007 only became available in 2008, due to slow communication between the various levels of government. – Wouter Kriel Contact Koos van Zyl on (012) 300 9500. |fw
