SAMPLE SURVEY OF LOS SES SUSTAINED DURING CHE NNAI FLOODS WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO LOSSES AND DAMAGES OF POSSESSIONS, LOSS OF WORKDAYS AND DAMAGE TO HOMES JANUARY 2016 SURVEY CARRIED OUT BY: Arunodhaya: Centre for Street and Working Children; Bhavani Raman; Citizen consumer and civic Action Group (CAG); Karen Coelho, Kavin Malar; Krishnaveni; Madhumita Dutta; Vettiver Collective; Prema Revathi; Priti Narayan; Students of Madras Christian College; TN Labour blog; and V. Geetha. 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A group of concerned citizens involved in relief work post-Chennai floods, 20015 undertook a sample survey of 610 households (including migrants) across the city to assess losses suffered/damages incurred to homes, goods, occupational tools and also to get an idea of loss of working days. The purpose of this survey was to identify the exact quantum of losses sustained by the population and to direct government to compensate the populace for damages/loss accruing on account of the floods. - Places surveyed: Eekaduthangal, Jaffarkhanpet, Saidpet, Kotturpuram (Adyar flood plains), Mudichur (badly affected suburb), Semmencheri, Perumbakkam (resettlement/new housing tenements for low-income groups), Kodungaiyur, Ponneri (outlying suburbs with poor infrastructural developments. - More than 95% of people surveyed had not received warnings about impending flooding. - Inhabitants of over 85% of households surveyed have lost 25-40 working days and concomitant wages, ranging from Rs 250-500/per day. - Almost all households had lost or were left with irretrievably damaged certificates, household articles, including fridge, washing machine, grinder, mixers, lights, fans, stoves, tools of trade, children's books, cycles and in some cases bikes and scooters. - Total losses sustained by households range from Rs 75,000 (including wages lost and cost of damage to homes) to Rs 500,000. It is clear that: - rampant real estate growth, unviable building sanctions, and encroachment on water bodies by powerful business and state interests have rendered urban flooding inevitable - the city of Chennai was utterly unprepared for disaster. The Comptroller and Auditor General's Report had pointed out that the State as such was unprepared. - the city of Chennai had not put early flood warning mechanisms in place; in spite of radar information pointing to a pattern of heavy rain and flooding, the city had not put in place a system for gradual release of water from overflowing water bodies - since government of Tamil Nadu had not sought to mitigate flood-related damages in spite of such damages being foreseeable, it must accept culpability for losses sustained by the people. Those who have suffered losses need to have recourse to restorative justice, to be compensated for losses sustained on account of state inaction or not adequate action. We demand: - proper enumeration of losses to be undertaken by the state government - due compensation amounts fixed and paid within specified time frame; that compensation is not linked to eviction and resettlement - that for purposes of compensation migrant working people are accorded the same rights as non-migrants. 2 BACKGROUND From November 9-December 1, 2015, Chennai city and its outlying areas, which are part of Kanchipuram and Thiruvallur districts received continuous and very heavy rain. The city was flooded at least three times, with the last flood, caused by non-stop rain on December 1, and the consequent opening of the Chembarambakkam Eri (tank) as well as various other Eris on the outlying areas causing enormous damage and devastation. We are yet to have a precise tabulation and description of what has been lost, destroyed and damaged. In addition to the efforts undertaken by government of Tamil Nadu by way of relief work in the immediate aftermath of the floods, various individuals, charitable organisations, non-governmental agencies, religious groups, and political parties have been working for nearly a month to feed, clothe, and offer medical assistance to the most affected and deprived populations. RELIEF WORK: IMMEDIATE AND LONG-TERM NEEDS: REASONS FOR UNDERTAKING SURVEY Those engaged in relief work were confronted with two realities: they had to attend to immediate needs, rescue people, provide them with safe shelters, ensure that they had enough to eat, and that they did not fall prey to diseases. At the same time, talking to those afflicted, it was clear to relief workers that individuals and families had lost a substantial part of their homes and possessions. This was true of all classes of people. The poor and the underprivileged had lost all that they had managed to acquire and save over the last 5-10 years, as well as all those given them by the government, by way of welfare handouts (such as mixer and grinder); had lost at least a month‟s work/employment and wages; and many had lost the tools of their profession, such as saws, hammers, electrical equipment, iron boxes, tailoring machines etc. The middle and upper classes and small businesses had also lost a great deal: vehicles, furniture, soft goods, entertainment systems, computers, stock (in the case of businesses) and documents. Even as relief workers acknowledged the quantum of losses suffered by various sections of the population, they had to also engage with the question of responsibility: who was to compensate such losses, and for what reasons. It was in this context that a group of concerned relief workers and citizens came together to undertake a sample survey of losses sustained by the city‟s laboring population; and also on a more modest level, undertake a survey of losses amongst the lower middle classes and middle classes. PURPOSE OF SURVEY The purpose of such a survey was to identify broadly: 3 1. The specific contexts of the flooding (day, timing, magnitude); and whether the city was prepared to handle disaster at the micro-level 2. The extent and scope of things lost as well as the value of what was lost. The survey was to thus provide a sample picture of devastation and loss, and on that basis seek from government of Tamil Nadu: a) A more comprehensive survey along similar lines to assess damages in other communities in flood-affected areas of Tamil Nadu; b) An enhancement of relief and reparations to the afflicted; c) And also long term support that would enable individuals and communities to restart trades and small business and make up for the loss of working hours and days. Such reparations and support have been forthcoming from government of Tamil Nadu in other contexts. In the wake of the tsunami of 2004, long-term support, including monthly allowance for 4 months for those who had lost or could not access livelihood options, was extended to afflicted populations within a year of the disaster (see Tsunami and One Year After, published by the Cuddalore Collectorate, 2005). This was part of what the government considered the „relief‟ phase, following which was the „rehabilitation‟ phase, which included further support packages for affected communities. The survey has a precedent in the detailed survey undertaken in Nagapattinam district, in the wake of the tsunami (2004) to identify the nature of claims and reparations that could be made on government. Following this, government orders were passed to expedite relief claims in the region. Similar surveys were undertaken in Odisha district, following the 2006 floods there and submitted to the State government. WHO WAS SURVEYED? As we have noted above, across classes and communities, people in the city of Chennai and its outlying areas have lost possessions, livelihood and businesses and have been left with damaged houses, or in some cases, with no houses. To understand better the impact of the floods, it was decided that we would look at a range of populations and areas – in the flood plains, resettled housing colonies on the fringes of the city, which are home to people displaced from the city on account of development or disaster, neglected city populations and neighbourhoods which bear the brunt of minimal or indifferent governance in times of disaster, and new residential areas, on the city‟s limits which are home to an emergent middle class. It was decided too that we could focus on how out-of-state migrant workers experienced the flood, since even at other times, their living situation is precarious. We identified the following neighbourhoods (and particular housing colonies and streets within these as suitable for our survey: 1. Eekaduthangal, Jaffarkhanpet, Saidapet, Kotturpuram: Floodplains of the Adyar River, which have long been vulnerable to flooding, and which also house substantial low-income groups 4 2. Semmencheri, Perumbakkam: Resettlement housing provided to communities of low- income persons evacuated from formerly vulnerable neighbourhoods in the city , including from lake-beds, river and canal banks 3. Kodungaiyur: North Chennai neighbourhood, which has suffered long-term infrastructural and population neglect; and additionally is home to low-income families 4. Ponneri : A fringe area on the outskirts of Chennai, which has seen the growth of a working class and lower middle class population 5. Mudichur/Old Perungalathur: New residential area that has emerged over the last decade and more, and are home to a growing middle class 6. OMR settlements of Migrant populations in and adjacent to Semmencheri In all 610 families were surveyed. See Table appended to this report for these and other details, including numbers of those surveyed, and value of damages, losses. METHODOLOGY OF SURVEY Our survey comprised two parts. The first part had to do with the flooding: when and for how long were homes flooded; the state of the flooded environment, whether flooding included sewerage outflows; were people given adequate warning about impending flooding or not; whether people who fled the flood were provided with adequate shelter and relief. This part was designed to get a sense of the city‟s flood-preparedness, and whether some of the losses and suffering that people endured could have been mitigated through adequate and early warning and communication.