Big Water Companies Quit Poor Countries (Privatisation failing)

[Gloria]

From the new World Media Watch up now at http://www.zianet.com/insightanalytical
Tomorrow at Buzzflash.com


5//The Guardian, UK Wednesday March 22, 2006

http://www.guardian.co.uk/water/story/0,,1736511,00.html



BIG WATER COMPANIES QUIT POOR COUNTRIES

· Political and consumer pressure forces rethink
· British firms identified as seeking less risky markets

John Vidal, environment editor


Millions of people could have to wait years for clean water as some of the world's largest companies pull out of developing countries because of growing doubts about privatisation projects, a major UN report reveals today.



(SNIP)

Water privatisation was seen by the World Bank and G8 countries as the most effective way to bring clean water to large numbers of poor countries throughout the 1990s, but in spite of investments of $25bn (£14bn) between 1990 and 1997, the rich have mostly benefited at the expense of the poor. Sub-Saharan Africa has received less than 1% of all the money invested in water supplies by private companies in the last 10 years.



(SNIP)



The UN report, which urges private firms to partner local authorities or governments, says the trend of privatisation is now reversing and that local and small-scale water companies are mushrooming. "Their potential to improve water supply remains unexplored ... There is a need to refocus privatisation. It is high time to bring the government back in," it says.



The report was broadly welcomed by development groups. "Water privatisation in developing countries has failed. Despite this, the UK government and the World Bank insist on supporting it at the expense of the world's poor. Governments and international institutions must ... invest public money in proven public solutions," said Peter Hardstaff of the World Development Movement in London.



In a separate report, the UK relief and development charity Tearfund claims that aid for water and sanitation from the EU and its members has been falling for five years, despite the fact that 6,000 children die every day as a result of poor water and sanitation. More aid money is going to middle-income rather than low-income countries, it says.

[kurth]

1. Air and water should never be privatized

[kenny blankenship]

2. The mystery is why anyone would consider this less than a shameful idea

A private water company is like any private company: it's going to want and need more profit from its water operation year over year. This means misery sooner or later.
What a shameful idea. What shameful people.
How did we let people speak about this in our presence? They should have been slapped into next week for just proposing it...

[NVMojo]

3. brought to you by the same folks who charge for blood transfusions

[anitar1]

4. Seems the whole world has become Bushworld. n/t

[peacetalksforall]

5. Nor the earth resources beneath the people in each of their

countries. The earth and atmosphere belongs to the people, not a band of barons.

[Erika]

6. This is so sick

They've written off the low income for the middle class?

[rodeodance]

10. the poorer countries/people are left behind (to please stakeholders)

[anotherdrew]

7. of course it's failing, just like everyone said it would

everyone but the usual suspects that is.

[no_hypocrisy]

8. It's immoral and unethical to "lock up the water".

I'll accept regulation and standards imposed by governments for purity and public access, but I'll never accept paying for survival.

[rodeodance]

9. "the rich have mostly benefited at the expense of the poor"

......Water privatisation was seen by the World Bank and G8 countries as the most effective way to bring clean water to large numbers of poor countries throughout the 1990s, but in spite of investments of $25bn (£14bn) between 1990 and 1997, the rich have mostly benefited at the expense of the poor. Sub-Saharan Africa has received less than 1% of all the money invested in water supplies by private companies in the last 10 years.

[NYC]

24. And THAT was the plan.

...the rich have mostly benefited at the expense of the poor...

[ConcernedCanuk]

11. Peasants defeat Big Business - RIGHT ON!!

.
.
.

I read a few articles where privatized water companies charge fees to people that used THEIR OWN WELLS for water because they were "circumventing" the company's water supply system.

Is their any humanity left in big businesses these days?

Or is it all just about $$$?

I fear it's just about $$, as it was Iraq's plan to switch to the Euro, as Iran plans to do, that has the USA bombing the shit out of the ME

That's My Canuk Thoughts anyhoo . . .

[Peace Patriot]

14. Yup, in Bolivia, Bechtel tried charging the poor for collecting RAINWATER.

It's global corporate predator policies like these that have in part inspired the leftist revolution in Latin America.

They've privatized our election system here (see my post, below), and it won't be long before they try to charge us for voting. You heard it here first.

[laheina]

20. That's disgusting.

re rainwater. I can think of several things that should be held in the public trust, and water and air are only the beginning.

This just goes to show what a scam upon the populace that "privatization" is.

[Canuckistanian]

12. Here's a radical idea

Why not aid poor governments DIRECTLY by GIVING them the technologies and resources needed to bring fresh water to the people?

Why the hell is profit the only motivation here?

[laheina]

22. Some links

http://www.waterforpeople.org/

Red Cross has some great water and sewage treatment programs all around the world. http://www.redcross.org/news/photoessays/tsunami05/three/

But to answer your question, I think that there is so much need for clean water in the world, that there is incentive for predatory corps to try to make a profit at the expense of people. This front is wide open right now, and hard work by caring individuals can stop companies from victimizing the poor people of the world.

[NashVegas]

26. Isn't That What the Peace Corps Were Set Up To Do?

help poor communities establish infrastructure & stuff? I coulda sworn it.

[Canuckistanian]

27. That's right

Does the Peace Corps even exist any more?

[Peace Patriot]

13. The privatization of the U.S. election system, in the 2001-2004, has also

had dire consequences, because it has made the American people helpless to stop an unjust war that has killed tens of thousands of innocent people, and because it prevents change, progress, regulation, and potential de-chartering of the worst global predators.

Two rightwing Bushite corporations--Diebold and ES&S--gained control of our nation's election system, in the 2001-2004 period, using "TRADE SECRET," PROPRIETARY programming code in the new electronic voting machines, with virtually no audit/recount controls--a voting system brought to you by the two biggest crooks in Congress, Tom Delay and Bob Ney, who pushed the $4 billion "Help America Vote Act" boondoggle on the states, with no controls on partisan vendors, no controls on secret programming, no paper trail requirement, no controls on lavish lobbying and "revolving door" employment, no controls on secret industry 'testing' of the machines, and underfunded regulation by a Bush-appointed commission.

What else should we expect from such a voting system but Bush and his "pod people" Congress retaining power, despite war and torture that 60% of the American people opposed at the time of the 2004 election, and a humongous deficit opposed by 90% (to mention just a few of the big disagreements between the Bush junta and the people).

When Bechtel privatized the water in one Bolivian city and jacked up the prices to the poor, the Bolivians rose up and threw Bechtel out of their country, and elected Evo Morales as president, Bolivia's first indigenous Indian president, thus aligning Bolivia with the huge leftist, anti-corporate, anti-imperialist revolution that has swept South America (--in Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, Venezuela, Bolivia and soon Peru).

Is our election system not as important?

Transparent elections = good government, of, by and for the people.

Non-transparent elections = the Bush junta.

It's a no-brainer.


----------------------------------------

Some resources for American Revolution II:

Breaking: www.VoterAction.org is suing the state of California and 18 Calif county registrars on behalf of 25 California voter/plaintiffs, for the illegal "certification" of Diebold election theft machines.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2180496


www.votersunite.org (MythBreakers - easy primer on electronic voting--one of the myths is that HAVA requires electronic voting; it does not.)
www.verfiedvoting.org (great activist site)
www.votetrustusa.org (news of this great movement from around the country)
www.UScountvotes.org (statistical monitoring of '06 and '08 elections)
www.solarbus.org/election/index.shtml (fab compendium of all election info)
www.freepress.org (devoted to election reform)
www.bradblog.com (also great, and devoted to election reform) (current: the breakdown of the election theft machines in Texas)
www.TruthIsAll.net (analysis of the 2004 election)* :patriot: :applause: :patriot:
Sign the petition (Russ Holt, HR 550, great bill-has 169 sponsors). http://www.rushholt.com/petition.html
www.votepa.us (well-organized local group of citizen activists in Pennsylvania, where important legal issues are at stake, including state's rights over election systems)

www.debrabowen.com (Calif Senator running for Sec of State to reform election system)
www.johnbonifaz.com (running for Massachusetts Sec of State on strong election reform and antiwar platform)

*Some tributes to TruthIsAll, who is very ill:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x417007
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x417231
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x675477

Also of interest:

Bob Koehler (-- four recent election reform initiatives in Ohio, predicted to win by 60/40 votes, flipped over, on election day, into 60/40 LOSSES!--the biggest flipover we've seen yet; the election theft machines and their masters are now dictating election policy!)
www.tmsfeatures.com/tmsfeatures/subcategory.jsp?file=20051124ctnbk-a.txt&catid=1824&code=ctnbk

Bob Koehler's latest: "Take this box and stuff it" (3/16/06)
http://commonwonders.com/archives/col337.htm

Amaryllis (Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia lavish lobbying of election officials - Beverly Hilton, Aug. '05)
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x380340

------------------------------------------------

Throw Diebold, ES&S and all election theft machines into 'Boston Harbor' NOW!

:think: :patriot: :woohoo: :patriot: :think:

[Judi Lynn]

15. With grim statistics and message of hope, UN marks World Water Day

With grim statistics and message of hope, UN marks World Water Day


22 March 2006 – The United Nations marked World Water Day today with calls for more equitable distribution and efficient use of a scarce resource; a grim reminder that 6,000 people, mostly children, die every day from dirty water; and a message of hope for one of the planet’s poorest regions, Africa, springing from its rich potential for irrigation.

“Let us recognize the cultural, environmental and economic importance of clean water, and strengthen our efforts to protect rivers, lakes and aquifers,” Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in a message.

“We need to distribute water more equitably, and increase the efficiency of water use, especially in agriculture. Let us mount a sustained effort - among international bodies, Governments and local communities, and across traditions and cultures - that will reach our goals.”

Mr. Annan warned that water continues to be wasted and degraded all over the world, in cities and rural areas alike, citing the grim statistics: 18 per cent of the world’s population lack access to safe drinking water; 40 per cent lack basic sanitation; every day, some 6,000 people, most of them children, die from water-related causes.
(snip/...)

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=17891&Cr=water&Cr1=Annan

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thanks for posting the Guardian article, Gloria.

[DUHandle]

16. It's closer to home

You might want to take a look at how your water and sewerage treatment plants are run.

In the past 20 years, management of these public services has gone from operation by civil servants to subcontractors with long term contracts.

One of them in the Midwest is dumping millions of gallons of partially treated sewerage into Lake Michigan every year.

[Lars39]

17. Yes!

If a community has used any federal funds to update,
there are clauses in the contract stating that private companies must be considered.

The Carlyle group recently stated that among other infrastructures in the US,they wanted to buy up water treatment plants.

[laheina]

21. Hi DUHandle!

Welcome to DU. :hi:

[Roland99]

18. Paul O'Neill (and Bono) were working to get aid to African nations for

potable water.

[Judi Lynn]

19. Private profits rise as poor pay more for water

Last updated: March 22. 2006 9:02AM
Private profits rise as poor pay more for water

By Mark Stevenson
Associated Press

MEXICO CITY - Violent protests have driven away corporate investment in desperately needed municipal water systems in developing nations. So the world’s poor buy bottled water from Coke, Pepsi and other multinational companies.

"Water is not for sale," demonstrators chanted at the World Water Forum this week. But they couldn’t be more wrong – private companies make much more money selling bottled water than they ever did developing public water systems. Companies also stand to benefit from a renewed push for big dams in the Third World.

So even though just about everybody, from CEOs to aid workers, spoke out against the privatization of water, the apparent victory for anti-corporate forces may prove hollow.
(snip/...)

http://www.wilmingtonstar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060322/NEWS/203220409/1002/BUSINESS

[oblivious]

23. Good LTTE in my local paper about water for all instead of big dams.

Saturday, March 18, 2006

Ensuring water for all
The World Bank article, "Slaking the thirst of poor nations",(March 14), implies that nations are poor because they have not adequately exploited their rivers with large hydropower dams and water reservoirs.
The bank is leading an aggressive resurgence of investment in water mega-projects in poor nations.

Hugely expensive big dams and water-diversion schemes help development banks make big loans. But they cannot make a substantial contribution to meeting the basic water, food and energy needs of the world's poorest people.

The good news is that it is technically possible, affordable and achievable to provide water for all those who need it in the coming years. Pro-poor (and pro-nature) water-management strategies include rainwater-harvesting tanks and embankments, affordable drip-irrigation and pump technologies, and farming techniques that reduce water needs while increasing yields.

Reaching the United Nations Millennium Development Goals by bringing 100 million small farming families out of extreme poverty through affordable water technologies would cost about US$20 billion over 10 years - less than a 10th of developing countries' investment in large dams in the 1990s - and with an economic benefit of US$300-US$600 billion.

Without a radical realignment of priorities in the water and energy sectors, the hope of water and energy for all will remain a distant dream.

PATRICK McCULLY, executive director, International Rivers Network

[ThomCat]

25. They stopped investing, sucked out profits, and now they leave.

How is this any big surprise? It's the capitalist model.

The investments that they did make were not in third-world countries, because they had no intention of keeping the business there. The whole idea from the start was to suck out all the short-term profit and abandon the now-decrepid infrastructure for the locals to deal with.

[NYC]

28. Argentina Fires Drinking Water Supplier.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2182392

New owner will be 90% government & 10% workers.

...Argentina ended its drinking water supply contract with Aguas Argentinas, a company partly owned by French utility Suez SA.

Aguas was supplying water to Buenos Aires, the government said the company failed to meet its contractual obligations and had reneged on its pledge to improve the quality of the water it supplied, the BBC reported Wednesday.

A new group called Aysa, which is 90 percent owned by the state and 10 percent by workers, will take over the contract.

[lovuian]

29. It was a ridiculous idea and the Majority rules

when they are thirsty!!!

[RazzleDazzle]

30. Fabulous news, just fabulous.

[Synnical]

31. Major, serious kick

Thanks for posting.

:kick: