{"id":26338,"date":"2026-09-28T06:25:09","date_gmt":"2026-09-28T00:40:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/eng.dragonmedia.com.np\/?p=26338"},"modified":"2026-09-27T20:49:47","modified_gmt":"2026-09-27T15:04:47","slug":"how-long-will-government-act-only-after-bridges-fail","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/eng.dragonmedia.com.np\/?p=26338","title":{"rendered":"How Long Will Government Act Only After Bridges Fail?<\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

Sunday\u2019s floods washed away bridge approach roads, inundated settlements and triggered landslides that damaged homes. Traffic between Bharatpur and Gaindakot stopped after a flood-swept boat became lodged beneath the Narayani Bridge. Damage to bridges and roads near the Kaligandaki cut off other communities. These incidents cannot be dismissed as separate seasonal accidents. Each raises the same question: how well prepared was the state to identify risks, monitor them and protect people before the floods arrived?<\/p>\n

When a bridge fails or a road closes, the consequences extend far beyond a few hours of travel delays. Patients struggle to reach hospitals, rescue teams lose access, and deliveries of food and medicine are disrupted. Farmers cannot get their produce to market on time. For communities dependent on a single crossing, a closure severs an essential link to daily life. Bridge safety is therefore more than a technical responsibility of road authorities. It is a public duty tied to people\u2019s lives.<\/p>\n

The incident at the Narayani Bridge raises a further question. Large vessels, construction materials and other structures kept near a river can become hazards to bridges during floods. Who assesses that risk? When flood warnings are issued, who is responsible for securing them? An inquiry is needed before assigning blame in this case. The responsibilities and procedures, however, must be clear now. Agencies cannot wait until an accident and then point to one another.<\/p>\n

The government should promptly assess affected bridges and roads and provide regular updates on which routes are safe, which remain closed and where alternatives exist. Decisions to reopen a bridge at risk must rest on technical assessment, free from guesswork or pressure. Local administrations, security agencies, road authorities and local governments must work from the same information. Conflicting advice exposes travellers and rescue operations to further danger.<\/p>\n

Immediate repairs must be followed by action on longer-standing weaknesses. Authorities should publish a list of places where rivers have changed course, banks are eroding, approach roads are weak or bridges have previously been damaged. The public should be able to see when inspections took place, what problems were found, who was assigned to fix them and whether the work was completed. Allocating a budget is not enough. Accountability depends on whether the spending reduced risk.<\/p>\n

A disaster tests the state first on whether it reaches those in danger, then on whether it gives the public reliable information. The harder test is whether it prevents the same weaknesses from causing harm again. Reopening routes and helping affected residents are urgent tasks. Every lesson from this flood must then become a specific assignment with a deadline and public oversight. A government that mobilises after a bridge fails must learn to fulfil its responsibilities before the next flood.<\/p>\n

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