Thiruvananthapuram: The Kerala state government has drawn criticism for allocating ₹75 lakh from the Disaster Relief Fund to organise a five-day workshop in collaboration with Norway’s Geo University, following the Chief Minister’s recent foreign visit. The government has justified this allocation, stating that the workshop aims to mitigate the risks of disasters, despite the significant climate differences between Kerala and Norway.
Kerala is known for its susceptibility to natural disasters like floods and rainstorms, which are common occurrences in the region. However, Norway experiences entirely different climatic conditions, characterised by snow and winter. This stark contrast has led experts to question the relevance and potential benefits of conducting disaster mitigation training in a foreign context.
Critics have raised concerns about the appropriateness of seeking disaster prevention expertise from a country with a vastly different environmental and geographical profile. They argue that Kerala’s efforts should focus on addressing its specific challenges and vulnerabilities to natural calamities rather than adopting strategies tailored for Norway.
This move comes in the wake of the state government’s previous foreign visits, including trips to countries like Norway and the UK, with the aim of attracting foreign investments and industries to Kerala. Despite substantial expenditures on these foreign visits, the state has yet to witness the anticipated benefits in terms of foreign investment and economic growth.
The decision to allocate a significant sum of ₹75 lakh for the upcoming workshop has reignited debates about the cost-effectiveness of such endeavours, particularly considering the economic challenges that Kerala has faced in recent times.
During a period of economic crisis, there was widespread criticism of the government’s substantial spending on foreign visits, which raised questions about the allocation of funds for initiatives that did not yield tangible results. The current allocation of funds for the Norwegian workshop has amplified these concerns, as critics question the government’s priorities and resource allocation decisions.
Comments