[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
DAM-L resend txt format: WTO and water
I couldn't read the first version I sent to the list so for anyone on the
list using non-graphical text-only like I am, here is an item of possible
interest to listmembers.
-Dianne
-----------------------------------------------------
-
From: svarghese@iatp.org
Date sent: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 12:20:58 -0600
Subject: HORRIBLE TO CONTEMPLATE: WTO PLANS MASS WATER SELL-OFF
To: dianne@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca
Right to Water (right-to-water@iatp.org) Posted: 11/07/2001 By
svarghese@iatp.org
============================================================
HORRIBLE TO CONTEMPLATE: WTO PLANS MASS WATER SELL-OFF
02 Nov 2001
Water companies with appalling environmental track records could be handed
control of water resources across the world if the European Union gets its
way at the World Trade Organisation talks in Doha later this month. The
European Union, including the UK, is pushing for further liberalisation of
trade in services including water services through the General Agreement
on Trade in Services (GATS) [1].
A Friends of the Earth report published today [2] shows how expansion of
negotiations to liberalise trade in water services means opening up this
sector - collection and delivery of water - to private service providers.
This could have a damaging impact on the global environment and poor
people's access to a clean, safe water supply. The plan is being promoted
by developed nations, especially the EU negotiating bloc, despite the fact
that water privatisation so far has often been bad news for vulnerable
communities and the environment.
In developing countries, water prices have often increased and level of
service decreased when multinational companies have been given
concessions. For example, since the French company Suez-Lyonnaise became
the major partner in Buenos Aires' privatised water utility in 1993,
prices have risen by 20%. In Manilla, MWSI (partially owned by
Suez-Lyonnaise)have been given permission to increase charges by a half,
despite failing to meet the key target of providing 24 hour water supply
to all connections. Poorer families, if connected to the water supply at
all, can no longer afford water.
In the UK, seven out of the ten most prosecuted polluters in 2000 were
water companies.Wessex Water Ltd (owned by the US utilities giant Enron)
which was the sixth worst; AWG(Anglian Water Group) Plc (which has
subsidiaries world-wide from Argentina to the Czech republic and Thailand)
which was the fourth worst; and Thames Water Plc (owned by Germany's RWE
and with interests as far afield as China, Nigeria, Egypt, Australia and
Brazil)was the third worst, with five court appearances and six
prosecutions. [3] By opening up the water services to the private sector,
GATS is enabling companies like these to expand their operations to the
rest of the world.
GATS was established in 1994, with extended negotiations beginning in 2000
(“GATS 2000"). Corporate lobbying was instrumental in establishing this
agreement and corporate lobby groups [4] often have direct links to the
relevant government ministers and well established forums where intensive
lobbying takes place behind closed doors. GATS and the WTO are
untransparent, undemocratic and biassed towards the interests of
multinational companies and developed nations.
This is not the forum for decisions to be made on water. Water is a
resource essential to life. Decisions about allocation and distribution
should be democratic and based on everyone's fundamental right to a clean,
healthy supply. Management of water resources needs to be based on
long-term sustainability rather than on profit maximisation.
Hannah Griffiths, Corporates Campaigner for FOE said:
“GATS has been created with the interests of multinational companies in
mind. The economic benefits lie with the companies. The damage -
environmental degradation and loss of local control, and often cuts in
services and hikes in prices - is done to communities around the world..
The private water companies are among the worst polluters. Water
privatisation has not delivered high environmental standards, but has
brought an increase in the price to the consumer, as well as allegations
of bribery, corruption and unfair labour practices. Despite this mountain
of evidence, the WTO and governments who support GATS plan to reward these
failed multinationals with even greater control of the world's water.”
Notes for Editors
1.The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) was made in 1994. In
2000, WTO negotiations on extended liberalisation of trade in services
(“GATS 2000") began. 2.Stealing our Water. Implications of GATS for Global
Water Resources. For a copy telephone 020 7490 1555
3.UK Environment Agency, 2001 'Spotlight on Business Environmental
Performance 2000', 'Multiple Prosecution Table', London
4.In particular the following lobby groups are pushing GATS: European
Roundtable of Industrialists (ERT); European Services Forum (ESF); Global
Business Dialogue on Electronic Commerce (GBDe); International Chamber of
Commerce (ICC); Transatlantic Business Dialogue (TABD); UNICE; US
Coalition of Service Industries (USCSI) --
--------end of forward from right to water list--------------------------