Back in 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, I asked the state minister for disaster management and relief, Enamur Rahman, on a television talk show what criteria had been used to classify the districts. He was unable to provide a clear answer. I also asked him why there was such extreme disparity in rice allocations for the poor during the pandemic. Again, there was no satisfactory explanation.
In some districts, the number of poor people is around 60,000. In others, it’s over two million. Similarly, the number of individuals able to cope with climate impacts varies greatly from district to district. These disparities must be taken into account in allocation decisions. But during the pandemic, rice allocations were made without considering poverty levels.
As a result, it was found that poor people in Munshiganj and Narsingdi received nearly three maunds (about 120 kg) of rice per person, while in Kurigram and Dinajpur, they received only four to five kilograms. This happened because districts were classified solely based on population and area. The lack of disaster-related statistics meant the government treated all districts the same, leading to such inequities in allocation.
Many ministries are involved in addressing climate vulnerability, such as the ministry of water resources and the ministry of environment, forest and climate change. Policies like this need to be introduced for their work in this regard. In several districts of Rangpur division, there are no measures in place to prevent erosion along the Teesta River.
As a result, hundreds of thousands of people living on both banks of the river are becoming homeless. Due to the absence of a comparative policy based on urgency, the government has allocated funds for work on the Ghaghot River, which is relatively less damaging, rather than on the Teesta. Yet, had that money been spent on the Teesta, it would have benefited many more people.