More than 200 dead after typhoon slams Philippines
Manila (AP): The death toll rose to more than 200 following the strongest typhoon to batter the Philippines this year, with 52 people still missing and several central towns and provinces grappling with downed communications and power outages and pleading for food and water, officials said Monday.
At its strongest, the typhoon packed sustained winds of 195 kilometers (121 miles) per hour and gusts of up to 270 kph (168 mph) before it blew out Friday into the South China Sea.
At least 208 people were killed, 52 remained missing and 239 were injured, according to the national police. The toll was expected to increase because several towns and villages remained out of reach due to downed communications, power outages and clogged roads, although massive clean-up and repair efforts were underway with the improved weather.
Many of those who died were hit by falling trees or walls, drowned in flash floods or were buried alive in landslides. A 57-year-old man was found dead hanging from a tree branch in Negros Occidental province and a woman was blown away by the wind and died in the same hard-hit region, police said.
Governor Arlene Bag-ao of Dinagat Islands, which was among the southeastern provinces first hit by the typhoon, said Rai's ferocity in her island province of more than 130,000 was worse than that of Typhoon Haiyan, one of the most powerful and deadliest typhoons on record and which devastated the central Philippines in November 2013 but did not inflict any casualties in Dinagat.
If it was like being in a washing machine before, this time there was like a huge monster that smashed itself everywhere, grabbed anything like trees and tin roofs and then hurled them everywhere, Bag-ao told The Associated Press by telephone.
The wind was swirling north to south to east and west repeatedly for six hours. Some tin roof sheets were blown away then were tossed back.
At least 14 villagers died and more than 100 others were injured by flying tin roofs, debris and glass shards and were treated in makeshift surgery rooms in damaged hospitals in Dinagat, Bag-ao said. Many more would have died if thousands of residents had not been evacuated from high-risk villages before the typhoon arrived, she said.
Like several other typhoon-hit provinces, Dinagat remained without electricity and communications and many residents in the province, where the roofs of most houses and buildings were ripped off, needed construction materials, food and water.
Bag-ao and other provincial officials travelled to nearby regions that had cellphone signals to seek aid and coordinate recovery efforts with the national government.
More than 700,000 people were lashed by the typhoon in central island provinces, including more than 400,000 who had to be moved to emergency shelters.
Police, soldiers and the coast guard rescued thousands of residents including in the riverside town of Loboc in hard-hit Bohol province, where residents were trapped on roofs and trees to escape from rising floodwaters.
Emergency crews were scrambling to restore electricity and cellphone service in at least 227 cities and towns, officials said, adding that three regional airports were also damaged.
Bag-ao and other officials expressed concern that their provinces may run out of fuel, which was in high demand due to the use of temporary power generators, including those used for refrigerated warehouses where large amounts of coronavirus vaccine stocks were stored. Officials delivered vaccine shipments to many provinces for an intensified immunisation campaign, which was postponed last week due to the typhoon.
At the Vatican, Pope Francis expressed his closeness Sunday to the people of the Philippines, referencing the typhoon that destroyed many homes.
About 20 storms and typhoons annually batter the Philippines, which lies between the Pacific Ocean and the South China Sea. The Southeast Asian archipelago also lies along the seismically active Pacific Ring of Fire region, making it one of the world's most disaster-prone countries. (AP)
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Govt comes out with set of FAQs on women's reservation bill
New Delhi (PTI): The government on Sunday came out with a set of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) related to the reservation for women in legislatures following the defeat of a Constitution Amendment Bill in the Lok Sabha that seeks to provide 33 per cent quota for women in the Lower House and state assemblies.
The FAQs came amid the Opposition's claim that in the name of women quota, the government was trying to carry out delimitation on its own will based on 2011 census.
Here are the FAQs:-
1. Which Bills were introduced by the central government in the Lok Sabha on April 16, 2026?
A:- On April 16, the central government introduced three key Bills in the Lok Sabha: The Constitution (One Hundred and Thirty-First Amendment) Bill, 2026, The Delimitation Bill, 2026 and The Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2026.
2. Why were these three Bills brought at this point in time?
A:- The 'Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam', commonly known as the Women Reservation Act, provides that reservation for women will be implemented based on delimitation after the Census conducted post-2026.
If the government had waited for the Census and subsequent delimitation, women would not have been able to benefit from 33 per cent reservation even in the 2029 general elections as the Census and subsequent delimitation period takes time.
Therefore, to ensure timely benefits to half the population, it was considered necessary to delink implementation of the Act from this condition.
3. What would have been the benefits if these Bills had been passed?
A:- If passed and approved, these Bills would have enabled women to receive 33 per cent reservation in the Lok Sabha as early as the 2029 general elections.
4. Why was delimitation linked with the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam, and why was there a proposal to increase seats?
A:- Delimitation means finalising the boundary of a constituency. It is essential for implementing women's reservation. The limit on seats in the Lok Sabha was set at 550 in 1976. In 1971, the population of India was 54 crore. Today it is 140 crore. Therefore, it is important to increase seats to 850 in the Lok Sabha. This would enable fair representation of people in Parliament.
5. Was there any attempt to modify the Delimitation Commission Act for political advantage? Would ongoing state elections be affected?
A:- No changes were proposed to the Delimitation Commission Act. The existing legal framework remains intact, and any recommendations of the commission would require parliamentary approval and Presidential assent.
Ongoing elections, including those in states like Tamil Nadu or West Bengal, would not be affected, as elections up to 2029 will be conducted under the current system.
6. What was the rationale behind increasing Lok Sabha seats to 850?
A:- The proposal was based on a proportional expansion approach. A uniform 50 per cent increase in seats would maintain the proportion for all states and UTs. Applying this principle to the current 543 seats would lead to approximately 815 seats. Therefore, the upper limit on seats was increased from current cap of 550 seats in Lok Sabha to 850 seats.
7. Would southern or smaller states have been adversely affected by the new delimitation proposal?
A:- No. All states would see uniform 50 per cent increase in seats. Southern states would not face any reduction in representation; rather, their overall share would remain stable. For example, Tamil Nadu's seats would increase proportionally, ensuring no disadvantage. The southern states currently have 23.76 per cent seats in Lok Sabha. This would have become 23.87 per cent after the passage of the Bills.
Lok Sabha seats in Karnataka would have increased to 42 from present 28; in Andhra Pradesh, the seats would have been 38 from the present 25; in Telangana, the total seats would have been 26 from the present 17; in Tamil Nadu, it would have been 59 seats from the present 39 and in Keralam, it would have been 30 from the present 20 seats.
Total seats in the five southern states would have been increased to 195 from the present 129.
This is 543 seats to 816 seats - 50 per cent increase model.
8. Would states that have controlled population growth face any disadvantage?
A:- No, as the increase in seats was proposed uniformly across states, their proportional representation would remain unchanged or slightly improve.
9. Would the representation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes be affected?
A:- No, the process of delimitation ensures proportional reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. With an expanded House, the number of reserved seats would increase significantly, thereby strengthening their representation.
10. Was this Constitutional Amendment Bill introduced to delay caste census?
A:- No, the government has already started a time-bound programme for caste census. The process includes detailed enumeration, and caste-related data will be recorded during the population count phase.
11. Why was there no separate quota for Muslim women within the reservation framework?
A:- The Constitution of India does not provide for reservation based on religion. Reservation policies are based on social and economic backwardness, as laid out in the Constitution.
12. Why was women's reservation not implemented in the 2024 general elections itself?
A:- Implementing reservation requires delimitation of seats. Delimitation is an extensive consultative process. It takes about two years to complete delimitation. Therefore, these Bills (including Delimitation Bill) were brought in Parliament for implementing women's reservation.
13. Why was the Women's Reservation Bill introduced in 2023 if it was not to be implemented immediately?
A:- The Bill was introduced and passed in 2023 to establish the legal and constitutional framework for women's reservation. Its unanimous passage reflected broad political support at the time, enabling the enactment of the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam.
14. Why was a separate Union Territories Bill required?
A:- Legislative Assemblies in Union Territories such as Jammu and Kashmir, Delhi and Puducherry are governed by separate legal provisions. Therefore, specific amendments were required to implement women's reservation in these regions, necessitating a separate Bill.
