[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
DAM-L Opinion piece on water privatisation/LS (fwd)
----- Forwarded message from Lori Pottinger -----
Return-path: <owner-irn-safrica@netvista.net>
Received: from DaVinci.NetVista.net (mjdomo@mail.netvista.net [206.170.46.10])
by lox.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca (8.8.7/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA08207
for <dianne@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:45:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: [(from mjdomo@localhost)
by DaVinci.NetVista.net (8.10.0/8.8.8) id f7NGdQS08144
for irn-safrica-list; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:39:26 -0700 (PDT)
(envelope-from owner-irn-safrica@netvista.net)]
Received: [from [192.168.1.99] ([205.178.127.217])
by DaVinci.NetVista.net (8.10.0/8.8.8) with ESMTP id f7NGdKI08127
for <irn-safrica@netvista.net>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:39:21 -0700 (PDT)
(envelope-from lori@irn.org)]
X-Sender: lori@pop3.netvista.net
Message-ID: <p05010408b7aae1943970@[192.168.1.99]>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:37:03 -0700
To: irn-safrica@netvista.net
From: Lori Pottinger <lori@irn.org>
Subject: Opinion piece on water privatisation/LS
Sender: owner-irn-safrica@netvista.net
Precedence: bulk
This is from the public sector unions in South Africa.
By Roger Ronnie
SAMWU General Secretary
Published in the "Sowetan" Newspaper
15th August 2001
The South African government has joined the governments of the rest of
Africa, who, with little experience, are scrambling to attract investors and
to privatise. There are very few people who can figure out why the
government is doing this. Privatisation of water certainly doesn't empower
anybody - there are only four European multinationals that have the monopoly
worldwide on water for profit. One of these, French Vivendi, has recently
started putting up water prices in the poorest countries of the world
because they need extra cash to inject into a Hollywood studio they acquired
recently.
So why would our government sell off our water, which already most of us
cannot afford to pay for? Does the government feel that it's okay if what we
pay the private water companies (coming soon) gets used to subsidise new
blockbuster movies? Maybe they do. If so, they are not alone. They have a
rather large and powerful ally - the World Bank. The Bank universally
promotes privatisation, using the one-size-fits-all framework, which has
dominated their policies for decades. They succeed in getting governments to
privatise by either using strong arm tactics, like threatening to withhold
future loans or making privatisation a conditionality for loans or debt
relief that is needed right away. This has been their practice across
Africa, but in South Africa it was much easier for the World Bank because
the ANC government simply invited them to write the whole economic policy,
GEAR, instead. So they didn't need any threats or force.
In Europe, water privatisation has been failing for decades, and in several
towns water has been "re-municipalised" or taken back from whichever
multinational messed up the service. In Africa, although water privatisation
is not that old a practice, recent research conducted by London-based
Greenwich University's Public Service International Research Unit uncovered
that where water was privatised, it was as disastrous as the European
experience.
The people of Nairobi, Kenya, for example, were forced to fork out over R160
million when Nairobi's water was privatised to French multinational
Generales Des Eaux. Soon after the company privatised, they decided to
install a new, and not budgeted for, R1.5 billion billing and revenue
collection service. Although the Mayor complained, the company proceeded and
put water prices up by 40% in order to pay for the new system. During this
time, 3 500 municipal workers were replaced by 45 foreign staff who earned
massive salaries from a total R13.6 million in the second year of the
contract, rising to R31.2 million per year by the end of the contract.
Just a week after this greed was exposed, the World Bank told the Kenyan
government that it should privatise all the roads in the country. Typically
of the World Bank, they announced that nine months of research to be
conducted by themselves would be followed by the appointment of a World Bank
consultant but that private companies should start sending in their bids
immediately! This is what the ANC government is doing - deciding to
privatise before finding out whether it is a good idea or not.
Privatisation of water was also bad for the poor of Guinea. Before
privatisation in 1989, fewer than 40 percent of the urban population had
access to piped water. The government was short of funds and needed donor
finance. Private participation was a condition of World Bank lending. The
workforce was cut almost in half from 504 employees to 290 and right after
privatisation, water prices were increased. The connection rate only rose by
9% in 7 years leaving over 30% of Guineans still without water. The high
price of water meant people could not afford to get connected - it was
difficult for even wealthy people to pay. (Prices in Guinea are higher than
average in Africa and Latin America.)
There is a public sector alternative to privatising water, which clearly
does not work in any case. In South Africa, this public sector alternative
is legislated in the Water Services Act. The Act says that other service
providers, such as multinationals, should only be brought in when all known
public providers have been exhausted and found unwilling or incapable of
doing the job. Another agreement was signed in 1998 between local government
and the trade unions for the public sector to be considered as the provider
of first choice. It concurs with national legislation that the public sector
is the preferred deliverer of services and specifies that involvement of the
private sector in service delivery should only be a very last resort--if
there is no public sector provider willing or able to provide the service.
However, the privatisation of water in Johannesburg, Nelspruit and Dolphin
Coast has been implemented in breach of these guidelines. Technically water
privatisation is unlawful in these three places. It seems that laws and
legal agreements are not worth the paper they are written on.
The government is still wasting money enriching the European multinationals
at the expense of the poor. For example, the Portuguese government financed
the building of a new water treatment plant in Matsulu, Nelspruit. The South
African government constructed it, and will operate it for one year. After
this it will be given as a gift to the multinational which is currently
increasing prices in Nelspruit, even though this company contributed nothing
to the project.
The ANC government is adamant that the people of South Africa will be forced
to follow the path of hardship trod by masses in other African countries who
have been subjected to Structural Adjustment Programmes. The people of
Mozambique were forced to submit to privatisation at the end of 1999, after
the country was told it would only be eligible for debt relief if they
agreed to sell off 70% of their water to European multinationals. One of the
multinationals is IPE from Portugal, the former coloniser of Mozambique.
Liberation movement governments are bringing colonisation back into fashion
through their constant capitulation to the World Bank's privatisation.
Similarly in Cameroon, last year, Suez Lyonnaise was selected as sole bidder
to acquire majority stake in the state water company for 20 years. This
privatisation had to be rushed through in order for Cameroon to qualify for
debt relief from the WB and IMF.
The water of Tanzania, Lagos in Nigeria, Ghana, and Congo is currently up
for sale. Community organisations in Ghana recently invited South African
trade unionists and community leaders to help formulate an
anti-privatisation campaign in that country, now known as the Ghana National
Coalition Against the Privatization of Water or the "CAP of Water". Yet
where the World Bank has funded some rural water schemes in Ghana, these
have failed because the Bank demanded that rural communities pay an upfront
cash amount towards constructing the water systems. "The policy has resulted
in excluding poor communities incapable of paying from enjoying their right
to consume portable water," says the CAP of Water.
There is overwhelming evidence that privatisation of water does nothing
except line the pockets of the four major multinationals who dominate the
world market. The companies themselves make no pretence that they want to
deliver a decent service to the community. For example, Biwater which
privatised Nelspruit's water, withdrew from a Zimbabwean water privatisation
project when it became clear that citizens could not pay the tariffs that
would be required for Biwater to make a profit.
The ANC government is pushing the workers of South Africa into strike action
at the end of this month. As workers of this country and members of
impoverished communities, we are determined to fight for affordable, good
quality water good delivered on the basis of need and not profit.
..../ends
--
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Lori Pottinger, Director, Southern Africa Program,
and Editor, World Rivers Review
International Rivers Network <'})))>><
1847 Berkeley Way, Berkeley, California 94703, USA
Tel. (510) 848 1155 Fax (510) 848 1008
http://www.irn.org
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to majordomo@netvista.net
with no subject and the following text in the body of the message
"unsubscribe irn-safrica".
----- End of forwarded message from Lori Pottinger -----