{"id":26277,"date":"2026-09-27T07:35:55","date_gmt":"2026-09-27T01:50:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/eng.dragonmedia.com.np\/?p=26277"},"modified":"2026-09-27T07:35:55","modified_gmt":"2026-09-27T01:50:55","slug":"show-the-cost-of-the-rescue-account-for-its-results","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/eng.dragonmedia.com.np\/?p=26277","title":{"rendered":"Show the Cost of the Rescue, Account for Its Results<\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

A claim that helicopter operations following the Bhotekoshi flood cost 14 billion rupees has spread through public debate. The available records do not substantiate it. The amount mentioned by the home secretary was money remaining in disaster-related funds, not a payment for helicopter services. That misunderstanding must be corrected. But correcting it does not relieve the government of its duty to disclose the actual cost and results of the rescue operation.<\/p>\n

Air rescue was necessary after the flood cut off roads and bridges. Helicopters were used to bring stranded people to safety, take injured people to hospitals and deliver relief to places that could not be reached by road. The need for every flight cannot be judged from a desk after the event. In the first hours of a disaster, a single timely flight can save lives. Scrutiny of the spending should therefore begin with accountability for public money, while recognising the work of rescue personnel.<\/p>\n

The flight figures released so far have been presented in different ways. The disaster management authority\u2019s overall flight count and records of charter flights from Kathmandu airport do not cover the same set of operations. Combining them to calculate a total number of flights or a total cost creates confusion. Likewise, a bill submitted by a private company, a bill approved after review and an amount actually paid are three different things. Had the government explained these distinctions clearly, the unsupported 14 billion rupee claim might not have spread so easily.<\/p>\n

An integrated public account is now needed. It should show which agency authorised each helicopter, where it flew, how long it was in the air, how many people it carried and what supplies it delivered. The government should also disclose company invoices, agreed rates, amounts approved after verification, fuel costs and payments made. Military and private helicopter costs must be presented separately to give the public a reliable picture of the total. Any disclosure of rescue records must protect the privacy and safety of the people involved.<\/p>\n

Results cannot be measured by flight numbers alone. Communities reached in time, people brought to safety, injured patients given treatment and relief delivered to isolated areas are tangible outcomes. The review must also examine places where assistance arrived late, flights that may have duplicated work and failures of coordination. An assessment grounded in evidence can improve decisions when the next disaster strikes.<\/p>\n

Citizens should not circulate unverified accusations, and the government should not evade legitimate questions. It must be stated plainly that no evidence has been found to support the claim that helicopter rescue cost 14 billion rupees. It must be stated just as plainly that the government has yet to publish a final, comprehensive account. Respect for those who saved lives and scrutiny of the public money spent on the operation can go together. Only a full disclosure will allow a fair judgment of the rescue\u2019s cost, necessity and results.<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t <\/div><\/div>\n\t\t