Στις 17 Φεβρουαρίου και μετά από συγκέντρωση ενάμισυ και πλέον εκατομμυρίων έγγυρων υπογραφών απ΄όλη την Ευρώπη,   μπαίνει προς συζήτηση «Το νερό ως ανθρώπινο δικαίωμα!" στο Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο.
 
Οι εκπρόσωποι της Πρωτοβουλίας Πολιτών "Right to Water" θα συναντηθούν με την Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή. και σύμφωνα με τον κανονισμό θα  τους δοθεί η ευκαιρία να εξηγήσουν τις απαιτήσεις τους και στις δύο συναντήσεις. Η συνάντηση με την Επιτροπή είναι κεκλεισμένων των θυρών, αλλά η ακρόαση στο Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο μπορεί να είναι ανοιχτή σε όποιον έχει δηλώσει συμμετοχή και έχει καταχωρηθεί εκ των προτέρων.

Η δημόσια ακρόαση οργανώθηκε από την Επιτροπή Περιβάλλοντος του Ε.Κ. με τη συμμετοχή των επιτροπών για τις ψηφοφορίες, την εσωτερική αγορά και την ανάπτυξη.  

Η συζήτηση θα ξεκινήσει στις 15.00 την Δευτέρα 17 Φεβρουαρίου και θα διαρκέσει μέχρι τις 18.30.


Η τελική απάντηση από την Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή αναμένεται μέχρι τις 20 Μαρτίου, δηλαδή λίγο πριν από την Παγκόσμια Ημέρα για το Νερό και τρεις μήνες μετά την υποβολή  1,65 εκατομμύρια έγκυρων υπογραφών προς υποστήριξη των αιτημάτων της Πρωτοβουλίας Πολιτών "Right to Water"

 Η Επιτροπή οφείλει να καθορίσει ποια μέτρα θα λάβει για να ανταποκριθεί στις απαιτήσεις της Πρωτοβουλίας ή να δικαιολογήσει την απόφασή της, αν αποφασίσει να προβεί σε περαιτέρω ενέργειες. 

Η μαζική συμμετοχή από όλη την Ευρώπη είναι προαπαιτούμενο για μια τόσο σημαντική παρέμβαση που είναι ουσιαστικά και η πρώτη που φθάνει σε συζήτηση στο Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο

Διαβάστε την επίσημη επιστολή από την "Πρωτοβουλία Πολιτών" Right to Water.


 On 17 February our European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) “Water is a human right!” will be the subject of a public hearing in the European Parliament. The same day we will meet with the European Commission. In line with the regulation on ECIs we will be given the opportunity to explain our demands in both sessions. The meeting with the Commission is a closed session but the hearing in the European Parliament (EP) is open to anyone who registers in advance.

The public hearing is organised by the EP Environment Committee with participation of the Committees for Petitions, the Internal Market and Development. It will start at 15.00 on Monday 17 February and last till 18.30. Please save the date! We will send out an invitation as soon as we have more details. We would welcome as many people as the room can accommodate to show massive support for “Right2water” in the EP.

The final response from the European Commission is due by 20 March, just before World Water Day and three months after we submitted 1.65 Million valid signatures in support of our demands. The Commission is required to set out what action it will take in response to our demands or justify its decision if it decides to take no further action.

We look forward to see many of you in the EP in Brussels on 17 February to support us! Check out our website for the latest news and info: www.right2water.eu

Like us on Facebook

Με την υποστήριξη :

European Federation of Public Service Unions

Representing more than 265 unions - 8 million public service workers

No army can win a war without good quality water. Dysentery took more lives in the U.S. Civil War than battle wounds. Likewise, the War on Poverty won't be won without healthy and affordable water.

The conversation this week about the War on Poverty is long overdue, especially welcome is the noisy clamor to raise the minimum wage. At the same time, families' budgets swell with multiple expenses. The War on Poverty will be won when some of those can be shrunk, especially those that can be more equitably shared. Let's take a look at water.

An account might start with the nearly $500 average that a U.S. households spends on water. On top of that, figure in their share of the $14 billion that U.S. households spend on bottled water -- to some degree motivated by a lack of trust in public water. Then there are important savings to take stock of: reduced health care costs due to good quality water. Those savings can be significant.

So upon first glance, the news released by the U.S. Conference of Mayors spelling out increased municipal spending for water and sanitation seems highly favorable.

"The historical spending record clearly establishes local government as the dominant investor in public water, and by virtue of the investment, also establishes local government as a critical water environment steward. Combined public water and wastewater investment is estimated to be $1.77 trillion from 1972 to 2010: $981.4 billion for water supply; and, $796.4 billion for wastewater systems."
The mayors' study begins in 1972, when not long after the War on Poverty began, the Clean Water Act was passed during the Nixon administration. It triggered massive public spending in public water.

While government investment in the water commons is terrific news, according to the U.S. Mayors report, "A serious concern for local government is the disproportionate financial impact on families at or below the poverty level ... because user fees command a greater percentage of their annual incomes. This disparate financial impact is regressive."

Not only is it regressive, but the investment is inadequate. The Conference of Mayors estimates that, "investment needs over the 20 year horizon (2008-2028) is likely in the range of $2.8 to $4.8 trillion." Many municipalities have already issued all the bonds they can without ruining their credit ratings. Local taxes and water rates have been rising to pay the costs.

The mayors support "the widely held view by Americans that water is a common good owned by everyone, and government should retain the authority to deliver it locally/regionally." Yet they raise concerns that water is becoming unaffordable, hampered by current rate structures, which can restrict differential pricing for varied users. They call for "a fresh look at local affordability and national water policy."

How can we improve the state of our water commons and guarantee the right to water and sanitation without driving families deeper into poverty? A Forbes article raises the possibility of a clean water trust fund as a solution for how to raise the money more equitably.

"In a 2009 study, the U.S. Government Accountability Office considered how to raise $10 billion annually for the fund and suggested that payment come from industries that profit from water or damage its quality, including those that make beverages, fertilizers and pesticides, flushable products, pharmaceuticals, water appliances and plumbing fixtures."

Such creative cross-subsidies offer an alternative to socking low-income users with "full cost recovery" -- covering all water operator costs with spiraling user charges. Behind such progressive financing is an affirmation that water is a public good, not dissimilar from public education. We all benefit from an educated population and so spread the expense across society. Likewise with water, the public health benefits are enormous. A clean water trust has the benefit of providing disincentives to polluters and is supported by consumer advocacy groups like Food and Water Watch.

At the same time, there are large savings in the water sector through innovation with green or natural infrastructure -- permeable surfaces instead of channeling all storm water into waste water treatment, water recycling, using one grade of water for showers and another for drinking and more. Upstream watershed management -- especially with water utilities at the helm -- also delivers savings, as New York City has proven in its partnership with upstate farmers. These are not simple transition for utilities to make, but there is a new hopeful current emerging.

Worldwide, the links between poverty reduction, public health and access to clean and affordable water are even more dramatic. For the billions of people without clean water and sanitation, climbing out of poverty while carrying a child sick with diarrhea is impossibly unfair.

Fifty years ago, it wasn't uncommon for water hoses to be used against anti-poverty and civil rights campaigners. Following in their footsteps, and taking a cue from Isaiah, we
might try bending those hoses into clean, affordable water for all.

--

Daniel Moss is Coordinator of Our Water Commons and active in the Reclaiming Public Water Network. He has recently published a report on public water utility investments in water source protection and watershed conservation entitled, "Urban Water Utilities and Upstream Communities Working Together."

Ο γνωστός και πολυδιαβασμένος σύγχρονος Γάλλος φιλόσοφος Αλέν Μπαντιού έρχεται την ερχόμενη εβδομάδα στην Αθήνα, προσκεκλημένος του Γαλλικού Ινστιτούτου, για να δώσει διάλεξη με θέμα 

«Η πρόσληψη του Πλάτωνα στην σύγχρονη φιλοσοφία» (Πέμπτη 23 Ιανουαρίου, 18.30).

Dear colleagues, friends, supporters of the ECI “right2water”,
We received a message from the president of the European Parliament, Martin Schulz, in which he announces that soon we will receive the invitation for the hearing in the EP about our ECI “Water is a human right!”.

It will be held by the European Parliament Environment (ENVI) Committee that has been put in charge of organising this hearing. They have planned it for 17 February 2014: from 15.00hrs to 18.30hrs.

Please mark this date!

In the hearing at the European Parliament also representatives from the Internal Market (IMCO) and the Development Cooperation (DEVE) Committee will be present because of the contents of our ECI, as well as the Petitions (PETI) Committee that will be present as permanent Committee for ECI hearings. So we expect to meet with a large number of MEPs.

To promote our ECI we would like to be with a large number of supporters in the EP, as it is a public hearing, so we hope you can make it with many people to join us at the EP in Brussels! 
  
We have officially submitted the (over 1.6 million) valid signatures on 20 December 2013, so the European Commission will give its answer to our demands by 20 March. The hearing is our opportunity to convince the European Parliament of the importance of our demands to implement the human right to water and sanitation in European law and show them the broad EU-wide support for it. Attached you will find our final documents with further elaboration of our demands that we have submitted together with the certificates of valid signatures.

We ask all supporters of our ECI to lobby MEPs in all countries to promote the demands of our ECI and gain their support. Many MEPs have already expressed their support for out ECI, but we would like to see a vast majority in the EP making a commitment to put the human right to water and sanitation into practice.
After the hearing and the answer from the European Commission the ‘normal’ procedure starts in which we would like to see as many of our proposals as possible to be turned in European legislative texts and actions. The final word will then be to the European Parliament.

We look forward to see you on 17 February in Brussels and we count on your continuous support to this campaign in its final stage.

Kind regards,
Jerry

---

Πόλη Brasov - Ρουμανίας
 
Ενα κυβικό μέτρο νερού στοίχιζε 0,37 lei ή (0.08 euro ) το έτος 2000. Από τότε η τιμή αυξήθηκε 11 φορές μέχρι το 2013. Η αντίστοιχη τιμή για την αποχέτευση αυξήθηκε 57 φορές. Όλες αυτές οι αυξήσεις έγιναν ενώ το εισόδημα των κατοίκων του Brasov αυξήθηκε τα τελευταία 10 χρόνια κατά 5,31 φορές, την ίδια περίοδο οι τιμές στα βασικά είδη κατανάλωσης αυξήθηκαν κατά 388,75%

Braşovul se apropie astfel de liderul tarifelor la apă şi canalizare din România, primul loc la acest capitol fiind ocupat de Constanţa, unde un metru cub costă 7,03 lei 

Πρέπει να γνωρίζετε επίσης ότι οι μισθοί της Ρουμανίας δεν ξεπερνούν τα 200-300 ευρώ ενώ οι συντάξεις τα 70-100 ευρώ.

ΠΡΕΠΕΙ ΟΛΟΙ ΝΑ ΚΑΤΑΛΑΒΟΥΜΕ ΟΤΙ ΤΟ ΔΗΜΟΣΙΟ ΝΕΡΟ ΠΟΥ ΑΠΟΛΑΜΒΑΝΟΥΜΕ ΟΛΟΙ ΦΘΗΝΑ, ΜΕ ΑΣΦΑΛΕΙΑ ΚΑΙ ΕΠΑΡΚΕΙΑ ΕΙΝΑΙ ΣΤΗΝ ΕΝΤΑΤΙΚΗ, ΕΝΑ ΒΗΜΑ ΠΡΙΝ ΤΗΝ ΙΔΙΩΤΙΚΟΠΟΙΗΣΗ ΚΑΙ ΕΧΟΥΜΕ ΚΑΝΕΙ ΕΛΑΧΙΣΤΑ ΣΑΝ ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ ΓΙΑ ΝΑ ΤΟ ΔΙΑΤΗΡΗΣΟΥΜΕ ΥΠΟ ΔΗΜΟΣΙΟ ΚΑΙ ΑΣΦΑΛΗ ΕΛΕΓΧΟ.

ΟΛΟΙ ΓΝΩΡΙΖΟΥΝ ΟΤΙ ΤΟ ΝΕΡΟ ΠΟΥ ΠΙΝΟΥΝ ΟΙ ΚΑΤΟΙΚΟΙ ΤΟΥ ΛΕΚΑΝΟΠΕΔΙΟΥ ΕΙΝΑΙ ΤΟ ΚΑΛΥΤΕΡΟ ΔΙΚΤΥΑΚΟ ΝΕΡΟ ΤΗΣ ΕΥΡΩΠΗΣ. 

Δείτε τις τιμές που έχει η ΕΥΔΑΠ και συγκρίνετε με τις τιμές σε πολλές πόλεις της Ρουμανίας.
 
ΕΥΔΑΠ
0 - 5 (m3) 0,39 euro
5-20 (m3) 0,61 euro

Top 10 tarife apă
1. Constanţa: 7,03 lei (1,56 euro)
2. Braşov: 6,93 lei (1.53 euro)
3. Iaşi: 6,47 lei (1,43 euro)
4. Bucureşti: 5,86 lei (1,30 euro)
5. Galaţi: 5,78 lei;
6. Cluj: 5,7 lei;
7. Timişoara: 5,41 lei;
8. Bacău: 4,85 lei;
9. Ploieşti: 4,58 lei;
10. Craiov a: 4,39 lei.

Ενα νέο μοντέλο επιχειρηματικότητας, μία από τις καλύτερες ιδέες κατά της κρίσης


Το StartingUp είναι μια πολυδράση, η οποία διοργανώνεται από το ΚέΠΝΕΤ (Κέντρο Προώθησης Νεανικής Επιχειρηματικότητας & Τεχνολογίας), σε συνεργασία με την Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή, το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο, την Ομοσπονδία Ελληνικών Συνδέσμων Νέων Επιχειρηματιών Ελλάδος (Ο.ΕΣΥΝΕ) και το Δήμο Αθηναίων (ΟΠΑΝ & Europe Direct). 

Ως συνέχεια του StartingUP v1, όπου και εφαρμόστηκε για πρώτη φορά στην Ελλάδα το Fund Raising Simulation, το ΚέΠΝΕΤ, με το StartingUP v2, επιχειρεί να δοκιμάσει ένα νέο μοντέλο επιχειρηματικότητας. Το concept του έχει ήδη παρουσιαστεί στο Ευρωκοινοβούλιο στις Βρυξέλλες και έχει αναγνωριστεί ως μια από τις καλύτερες ιδέες κατά της κρίσης.

Στο πλαίσιο αυτό, θα διοργανωθεί επιπλέον μια σειρά από Ημερίδες & Διημερίδες Φοιτητικής Επιχειρηματικότητας, σε συνεργασία με ιδρύματα τριτοβάθμιαςεκπαίδευσης σε όλη την Ελλάδα. 

Η πολυδράση ξεκινάει επίσημα στις 10 Ιανουαρίου, με την διοργάνωση ενός ευρωπάνελ, με τρόπο που γίνεται για πρώτη φορά στην χώρα μας.

Θα διεξαχθεί στο Πνευματικό Κέντρο του Δήμου Αθηναίων Αμφιθέατρο «Αντώνης Τρίτσης» (Ακαδημίας 50, 10552, Αθήνα ώρα προσέλευσης 4μμ). 
 Το Ευρωπάνελ με τίτλο :


θα αποτελείται από Έλληνες Ευρωβουλευτές, εκπροσώπους από όλα τα Ευρωπαϊκά Κόμματα, οι οποίοι θα απαντούν σε ερωτήσεις του κοινού, όσον αφορά την Επιχειρηματικότητα, την Ανάπτυξη, την Καινοτομία και την Απασχόληση (των νέων ειδικά) και το ποιος ο ρόλος της Ευρώπης σε αυτά.

Οι Ευρωβουλευτές,θα έχουν αποκλειστικά την ευρωπαϊκή και όχι την ελληνική κομματική ταυτότητα τους. Επιπλέον, θα παρουσιαστεί το συνολικό concept του StartingUp με βαρύτητα στο καινοτόμο μοντέλο αξιολόγησης νέων επιχειρηματικών ιδεών (βασισμένο στο IDEA framework το οποίο προωθείται από την Ο.ΕΣΥΝΕ).

Περισσότερες πληροφορίες για το StartingUp μπορείτε να βρείτε στην ιστοσελίδα www.StartingUp.gr

Δείτε το πρόγραμμα ΕΔΩ

Η SUEZ ENVIRONNEMENT, μέσω της θυγατρικής της AGBAR, ανέλαβε τη διαχείριση του ολοκληρωμένου κύκλου του νερού (ύδρευση και αποχέτευση) της Μητροπολιτικής Περιοχής της Βαρκελώνης για περίοδο 35 ετών με αναμενόμενα έσοδα 3,5 δισ. ευρώ.


Η AGBAR και η AMB (Μητροπολιτική Περιοχή της Βαρκελώνης) δημιουργούν κοινοπραξία με αντικείμενο τη διαχείριση του νερού και των λυμάτων σε 24 δήμους, περιλαμβανομένης της πρωτεύουσας της Καταλονίας και των γειτονικών κοινοτήτων. Η κοινοπραξία θα αποτελεί σύμπραξη δημόσιου και ιδιωτικού τομέα με συμμετοχή της AGBAR κατά 85% και της Μητροπολιτικής Περιοχής της Βαρκελώνης κατά 15%. Η εταιρεία θα λειτουργεί με την επωνυμία Aguas de Barcelona και θα εξυπηρετεί τρία εκατομμύρια κατοίκους.

Με τη συμφωνία αυτή, η ΑΜΒ ενισχύει τη συνεργασία της με την AGBAR και της εμπιστεύεται τη διαχείριση των λυμάτων, παράλληλα με τη διανομή του νερού που ήδη διαχειρίζεται η AGBAR. Με τον τρόπο αυτό η AGBAR – ηγέτιδα δύναμη στον τομέα των υδάτων στην Ισπανία και σημαντικός παίκτης στη Νότιο Αμερική – θέτει στη διάθεση της νέας εταιρείας , Aguas de Barcelona, και των 940 εργαζομένων της, την εμπειρία και την τεχνογνωσία της στο χώρο του νερού και ιδιαίτερα της βιώσιμης διαχείρισης των υδάτινων πόρων, που αποτελεί σημαντική πρόκληση σε περιοχές οι οποίες αντιμετωπίζουν τις ελλείψειςτου νερού, παράλληλα με καταρρακτώδεις βροχές.

 ΠΗΓΗ: ΗΜΕΡΗΣΙΑ (6-12-2013)

Αυτό που διαβάσατε αποτελεί την μια άποψη. Δείτε όμως και την άλλη.

 Η  επαναδημοτικοποίηση του νερού είναι ένα ασταμάτητο κύμα :

• The case of Berlin: Veolia, adieu!

• Paris takes back control over water: eau la la!  

 Ακολουθεί το άρθρο, το οποίο μπορείτε να κατεβάσετε και στον υπολογιστή σας.

On November 2013, Barcelona hosted a seminar organised by Reclaiming Public Water (RPW), an international network that brings together water activists, trade unions, academics, and public water operators working to promote public and democratic models as an alternative to the privatisation and commodification of water.


The network is based on the principle that water is not a commodity, but rather part of the commons and a fundamental right as well as an essential resource to life, so it cannot operate under market rules. Over the last 20 years global movements and platforms such as RPW continue to confront the global neoliberal drive to privatise and commodify public services, including water, and advocate for exploring and implementing alternatives.
Over two intense days participants debated questions such as: What does public mean exactly? And does public equal democratic? How can we build services that are democratic, environmentally sustainable, and are also responsive to people’s needs? How can we strengthen the struggles against the privatisation of water services and the commodification of water resources? What alternatives are delivering good results?
In the framework of alternatives, participants highlighted the so-called ‘public-public partnerships’ or PUP, which are non-profit partnerships between public water operators that seek to strengthen technical and managerial skills. PUPs are an innovative and concrete tool for sharing knowledge and experiences among public operators, as well as to promote best practices and improve service performance. They also provide the socio-political support needed to develop this kind of cooperation.

Remunicipalisation is a strong and growing trend, both in the Global North and South.

Another alternative that is gaining momentum is service remunicipalisation. In these cases, local governments are returning to public management, usually after a bad experience with the private sector. In fact, according to a study by the Public Services International Research Unit, as of November 2013, there were 86 documented cases of water remunicipalisation around the world. Of these, all except three took place between 2000 and 2013, and the pace has nearly tripled since 2009. Remunicipalisation is thus emerging as a strong and growing trend, both in the Global North and South.
With a view to sharing specific experiences of remunicipalisation and some of the seminar conclusions, the RPW network and Aigua és Vida, a Catalan platform made up of social, neighbourhood, trade union, environmental and solidarity groups, and which advocates for the public management of water, organised a public event to explore several concrete cases in Europe. 

Barcelona: abusing the private monopoly

“The situation in Catalunya, and more specifically in Barcelona, is very different from the one in Europe,” noted Eloi Badia in his opening remark. Eloi is from Engineering without Borders, an organisation that works for social change and that is part of Aigua és Vida. “Here, we are only told about the traditional French and English models, which are based on private supply, but not about the new realities in France or Germany, where public supply is increasingly widespread.”
Indeed, over 80 per cent of the water supply in Catalunya is not only in private hands but relies on a single company, Agbar, a subsidiary of Suez, amounting to a virtual monopoly. In the specific case of Barcelona and its metropolitan area the situation is even more remarkable. In 2010, a court decision ruled that “there is no service concession nor contract,” so “Agbar’s operations, as the service concession holder, are unlawful.” The platform has since been promoting transparent and democratic management and among other actions, in February 2013 filed a lawsuit against Agbar with the prosecutor's office on the grounds that the company is providing the service without the due contract.
The city government aimed to solve the obvious flaw in Agbar’s operations in Barcelona by creating a joint venture. According to Eloi, “the new company has been set up with no public tender, no asset auditing and no review of the loophole through which Agbar was operating in many municipalities.”

In Barcelona the water company is providing the service without the due contract.

Beyond the company’s legal structure, Aigua és Vida warns that we are not only faced with a choice between ‘users’ or ‘customers’ (to use the company’s favoured term), but the fact that for these corporations the customers are municipal councils themselves, meaning the role councils can play as regulators to oversee the public service is effectively nullified. Moreover, the platform claims that water bills in Catalunya have increased by 15 per cent in 2013, and by 65 per cent since 2008.
“Sometimes, a picture speaks a thousand words. One needs only to take a look at the 2009 corporate responsibility report cover of Aigües de Barcelona, Agbar’s subsidiary responsible for the water supply management in Barcelona that shows a tap with a water trickle in the shape of a bar code. What kind of water policy do we want to promote?” asked Eloi. “One that serves the people or one that serves companies and profit-making?”

In this context, Aigua és Vida wishes to start a remunicipalisation campaign throughout Catalunya and Spain and has invited others with successful experiences to serve as inspiration.

Paris takes back control over water: eau la la! 

If there is a case that strongly symbolises that remunicipalisation is a viable alternative it is the city of Paris. The French capital is not only home to the headquarters of the two largest water companies in the world, Veolia and Suez, but until 2009 its water supply depended on these very companies.

Bruno Nguyen, Operations Director at the new public water utility Eau de Paris, explained that the whole water supply in Paris was managed by the city until 1985, except for a notable exception — the billing system, which was privately handled. Between 1985 and 1987, the water distribution was privatised and divided between Suez and Veolia, while production remained in the hands of a joint venture called SAGEP. But the situation posed many irregularities and finally, in 2010, the city took back control over its water, this time completely, by creating the company Eau de Paris.
Before water remunicipalisation, there were many problems, such as a lack of control over management. “Concessions were awarded without calls for competition, contracts lacked clear objectives, so it was difficult to ask private operators for accountability, and money flows were opaque,” said Bruno. The system was also very complex. “End users did not understand how responsibilities were divided, and there were several technological solutions, depending on each operator.”
For these and other reasons the city decided it was high time for a shift. The process began in 2001, after a new mayor came into office, and included several years of research and negotiations with all stakeholders, from the private operators to the workers. The process was guided by the idea that water is a strategic activity and pursued two major aims: suppressing duplicate services and achieving savings for the benefit of users. Finally, in 2010, Eau de Paris started operating under the principles that water is a common good and must therefore be preserved through a responsible and equitable management.

After three years of operation, the overall picture is very positive. “Back in July 2011, only a year after starting operating, the cost of drinking water dropped by eight per cent.” Bruno also cautions that the process has not been without difficulties. Among other things, he mentions issues such as “human resources, since it was not easy to start a new culture at the company, and information management systems, which belonged to the private operators so we had to make a deal to be able to use them temporarily.” However, there are also positive developments and, despite the transition, “the service was never altered, the invoicing system is now more accurate and fair, and the company call-centre is now run in-house and works better.”
The company is currently saving around 30 million euros every year. This money is no longer going into the pockets of private shareholders as with the previous model, but it is rather being reinvested in the company itself. With this money, for example, “we are keeping a high level of investment in infrastructure and we have doubled our solidarity fund.” In addition, the company board is now open to civil society, and involves NGOs and company staff, all of them with voting rights. 

The case of Berlin: Veolia, adieu!

“I am very happy to be able to tell you today that, finally, the water in Berlin is a hundred per cent public,” Dorothea Haerlin announced with great satisfaction. “I come from the Berliner Wassertisch, the Berlin Water Table, a very small grass-roots group which has been in the streets since 2006 demanding that the city took water back into public hands.”
In 1999, the Berlin city government approved the sale of 49.1 per cent of the shares of the company Berlin WasserBetrieb to a consortium made up by two water corporations: the French company Veolia and the German company RWE. But citizen groups, such as the Berlin Water Table, convinced that water is a right and not a commodity, have fought for years to push out private companies and for the city to regain control over this resource.

“After many actions, on the 7th of November the Berlin city council agreed to buy back Veolia’s stake for 590 million euros, and RWE’s for 650 million euros,” said Dorothea. “This is good and bad news at the same time.”


“First, the good news,” she added jokingly. “The good thing is that the water in Berlin is now fully public, so the company that manages it can be transformed into a democratic, transparent, fair and environmentally sustainable company. The bad news,” continued Dorothea, “is that the company still holds a strong business vision and the city government expects to raise the whole amount paid to the private operators, 1.3 billion euros, through user fees.”
In fact, by purchasing the shares from the private companies, the public utility took on a debt that it must pay over the next 30 years and that, including the accrued interests, adds up to around 2 billion euros. “The Berlin city council and the Finance minister say there is no problem with this money, because they will now get the profits that used to go to others but that was not the goal of our struggle,” regretted Dorothea.
The Berlin Water Table representative compared the process of citizens demanding a public and democratic service management with a treasure hunt in a castle. “When you open a door and you you think you have found the treasure, a larger door opens, and you find more stairs.” Indeed, this has been the experience of her collective. In February 2011, for example, the Berlin Water Table organised a popular referendum calling for the partial water privatisation contract to be published. And for the first time in the history of the city, a referendum of this kind achieved the minimum number of votes to render it legally valid. This meant a great victory that they could have never imagined possible just a few years earlier but it also meant more work.
“The main objective now is encouraging a public debate,” she further explained. So far, a first draft of the Berlin Water Charter has been produced, an initiative that will begin to be discussed in a new space, the Berlin Water Assembly. “The idea is to build a body that does not yet exist and that allows everyone interested in water issues to participate in a debate process. The ultimate goal is that these people are given a space to actively participate in the daily management of the water utility and not only oversee what is being done by the board after the fact.”
Dorothea concluded by recalling that the process of public recovery is a long one. “After we managed to get the service back in Berlin, we took a photo in front of the city council with a banner that read ‘after remunicipalisation, democratisation’. So I hope that I will be able to bring you more good news very soon.”

Aguas del Huesna: political commitment and management excellence
Emilio Pachón, manager at Aguas del Huesna, a public company in the Spanish province of Seville, started telling about his experience with a joke: “You have no idea how I envy our colleague from Paris. His company covers around nine square miles and all users are concentrated. We supply 22 municipalities with a population ranging from 300 to 50,000 inhabitants and they are all scattered throughout more than 150 miles.”
Emilio passionately recounted the 20-year history of this public utility, owned by the Huesna Water Consortium, whose purpose is to provide an integrated water cycle in all of the municipalities involved in the Consortium. Head-quartered in Seville, Aguas del Huesna operates at a regional level since it was established in 1993, first under a private model and since 2007, as a remunicipalised company.
“In 1994, 17 municipalities in the province of Seville realised that the water supply situation was unsustainable. There was a lack of sustainable and safe drinking water sources; irrigation channels and wells were contaminated.” For this reason, the municipalities decided to pool their resources and develop a mega-project to bring water to the whole area. “It was a massive project,” Emilio said, “with nearly 155 miles of supply network.”
This mega-project also required many funds, but due to the municipalities low investment capacity in a mainly rural environment, the Consortium opened a privatisation process and invited bids for a 25-year build-operate contract. In this context, the Huesna Water Consortium drafted a thorough list of operation specifications to guide the concession. This included requirements such as the private operator explaining in detail the user rates and reporting its benefits. Finally, the building works were awarded to a private company and then things kicked off.
The works were carried out between 1994 and 2001, but they entailed a cost overrun of 25 per cent over the initial budget. “And here is where the battle began,” recalled Emilio. “The private operator wanted the extra funds to be recognised and raise them through user fees over the years of the concession contract. But the Consortium refused.” In 2001, after many breaches in the operating specifications, all the stakeholders decided to establish a joint venture. The Consortium would be involved in the company management, with a 25 per cent capital stake. Thus, the Consortium joined the management board and the concession contract was extended for seven years. “And here we started a new journey, from being an administrative concession to a joint venture.”

However, the situation did not improve and problems persisted. Decisions, ultimately, were still being taken by the private sector but with the complicity of the public Consortium. New conflicts arose until, in 2007, both sides reached another agreement so that the private operator would leave the joint venture and sell its shares to the Consortium.
Since then, Aguas del Huesna is one hundred per cent public. “We could say this was a non-aggressive remunicipalisation,” remarked Emilio. This solution allowed the Consortium to access funds and reach agreements with financial institutions to invest in areas that had been neglected by the private sector. Since 2007, rates have not risen above the consumer price index, and in its lowest water use range, the rate is below the average in the province of Seville.
Emilio summarised the lessons learned with this remunicipalisation process in two major points: “political commitment and management excellence.” Political commitment is not only needed to regain control of the public utility itself and bypass the private operator, but also to continue supporting the public model, because the attacks by the private sector do not stop after remunicipalising. As for management excellence, Emilio stressed that “we must compete with the same weapons. The service we provide must be very effective and efficient and up to date. Otherwise, the gaps left by the public sector are filled up by the private sector. Our duty is to provide a high quality service.” 

Remunicipalisation: an unstoppable wave
David McDonald, professor at Queen’s University in Canada and co-director of the Municipal Services Project, closed the event with some concluding remarks. David is co-author of a booklet recently published under the title ‘Remunicipalisation: Putting Water Back into Public Hands’. “Our study,” David explained, “shows that a growing number of cities around the world are remunicipalising their water services. From Hamilton, in Canada, to Dar Es Salaam, in Tanzania, and from Buenos Aires, Argentina, to Malaysia.”
David added that “this is not an academic invention. We academics just follow the real people, who are the ones that know better,” and according to his research, “remunicipalisation is one alternative among others, part of a wider trend to rethink public spaces not just in water but also in other areas such as energy and health care.”
In any case, the time has come to put forward serious alternatives to privatisation. “Why?” asked David, “simply because it has failed. Companies have not only failed to deliver their promises, but in some cases, where they were not making the profits they expected, they left. That was what happened in Buenos Aires. The private operator just packed up and left.”
The case studies explored by David reveal that the remunicipalisation process is usually far from easy — there are many obstacles to overcome and there are no silver bullets that work in all contexts. It is often the case, for example, that internal resistances emerge. Companies must learn again how to operate and a public ethos cannot be built overnight. For example, in Cochabamba, Bolivia, which was the scene in 2000 of the so-called ‘water wars’, they have been working for 10 years to create a new public service.

When they say that the public sector does not work, we do not have to believe them.

However, those same studies show that remunicipalisation can also work. “It might not be perfect,” noted David, “but probably no service can be perfect, regardless of the management model.” In any case, David was straightforward: “When they say that the public sector does not work, we do not have to believe them.” And his research clearly demonstrates that remunicipalisation is a global and increasing trend. “Even in the United States, in conservative municipalities, we are seeing that services are increasingly being in-sourced, because there is growing awareness that the private sector is very expensive and makes it difficult to monitor services and contracts. It is therefore not only a question of ideology.”
David concluded his intervention explaining that “in these last couple of days, we have documented 86 remunicipalisation cases worldwide. I insist that these are not perfect companies, but they are innovative, and pursue principles of equity, transparency, democracy, and sustainability. Remunicipalisation is an unstoppable wave and I am sure that the list will very soon reach a hundred cases and will keep growing.” 

For more information

Video: Putting Water Back into Public Hands (5 minutes):http://www.tni.org/multimedia/putting-water-back-public-hands/
Water Remunicipalisation Tracker: http://www.remunicipalisation.org/
Water Justice – Resource centre against privatisation: http://www.waterjustice.org/

ΧΟΡΕΥΟΝΤΑΣ ΜΕ ΤΑ ΝΕΡΑ ΚΑΙ ΤΑ ΧΡΩΜΑΤΑ - ΒΑΡΚΕΛΩΝΗ

•  Από την αρχή, η ένωση ήταν ανοικτή σε ιδιωτικές εταιρείες ύδρευσης, εκπροσωπούμενη από την Aquafed, μια ομοσπονδία από τις μεγαλύτερες πολυεθνικές του νερού στον κόσμο. Ο Gérard Payen, πρώην διευθύνων σύμβουλος της Διεύθυνσης των υδάτων της Suez, αντιπροσωπεύει αυτήν την ομάδα στη Gwopa, και πρόσφατα ανανεώθηκε η θητεία του στην οργανωτική επιτροπή για άλλα τέσσερα χρόνια.

• Στον φάκελλο τεκμηρίωσης λειτουργίας της Gwopa αναφέρεται επίσης η ανάγκη για «εμπορικά βιώσιμες" υπηρεσίες ύδρευσης και τείνει να χρησιμοποιεί τους ίδιους στενούς δείκτες των οικονομικών επιδόσεων που χρησιμοποιούν και οι ιδιωτικές εταιρείες, ενθαρρύνοντας τις αρχές λειτουργίας που βασίζονται στην αγορά. 

•  Το "δημόσιο" νερό είναι διαφορετικό από το"ιδιωτικό"  και η  Gwopa πρέπει να καταλάβει πού στέκεται σε αυτή τη συζήτηση, αν επιθυμεί να συμβάλλει σε μια καινοτόμο  πολιτική και  πρακτική του νερού.

Εγώ θα συμφωνήσω με τους προβληματισμούς που έχουν μπει και μένει να αποδειχθεί αν το μικρό πλοίο είναι πράγματι τόσο μικρό όσο φαίνεται.  Μη ξεχνάμε αυτό που αναφέρθηκε και προηγούμενα, ότι :

Η συντριπτική πλειοψηφία των συστημάτων νερού στον κόσμο παραμένει στα χέρια του δημοσίου, και πολλά άλλα δίκτυα βρίσκονται στο στάδιο να τεθούν και πάλι στα χέρια των κυβερνήσεων.

Over the past 30 years, there has been an almost religious commitment to the privatisation of water on the part of the World Bank, international donors, and many UN agencies. Millions are spent each year by these institutions on pro-privatisation conferences, workshops and publications, not to mention loans and grants to make it happen.

It is refreshing, therefore, to know that there is at least one UN institution committed to improving public water provision. Founded by UN-Habitat in 2009, the Global Water Operators' Partnerships Alliance (Gwopa) is a platform for bringing together public water operators from around the world.
The agency's mandate is to build public sector capacity, while at the same time creating "solidarity, learning, friendship, cultural experience, career development and integrity" across municipalities and countries. Many innovative north-south and south-south linkages have emerged, and public water is better off because of it.
Participation in Gwopa is also open to organised labour, NGOs, community groups and academics, as evidenced at the agency's second congress, which took place last month in Barcelona.

This is a small, pro-public ship on a rough, pro-private ocean, but it is an important institution that has the potential to create meaningful networks, conduct critical research, and build links between governments, unions and communities.
These kinds of "public-public partnerships" are not new, of course. They've been happening on their own for decades. Nor are they the only interesting trends taking place in efforts to retain, reclaim and reimagine public water. From grassroots struggles to rebuild traditional water systems in rural Mexico to worker co-ops in Bangladesh to the remunicipalisation of water services in Paris, the shift (back) to public water systems is gaining global momentum.

And no wonder. Research has shown that public water can outperform private companies even on their own narrow financial terms, not to mention doing a better job with equity, participation and public education. No public service will ever be perfect, but there is growing understanding of what makes public water work, how we might make it better, and the variety of ways of getting there.
As a UN institution, Gwopa is uniquely placed to advance this agenda and help break down the geopolitical barriers that can make it difficult for public utilities to work with each other across borders. For this reason alone, it is an institution worth fighting for.

Gwopa has its internal tensions, however. From the outset, the association has been open to private water companies, represented by Aquafed, a federation of the largest water multinationals in the world. Gérard Payen, former CEO of Suez's water division, represents this group at Gwopa, and was recently reappointed to the steering committee for another four years.



Gwopa documentation also talks about the need for "commercially viable" water services and tends to use the same narrow financial performance indicators as private companies, encouraging market-based operating principles.

The agencies that fund Gwopa appear to reinforce these trends, with one senior aid representative at the Barcelona congress suggesting she "does not care if the water providers [involved in the alliance] are public or private, as long as they get the job done".

There is also creeping commercialisation evident in some of the public water utilities working within Gwopa, many of which think and operate like private companies (for example by seeking private contracts outside their own country). This serves to blur the lines between public and private.

These are not insignificant strains. Gwopa must decide what it means by "public water" and how it wants to evaluate successful public performance. It must be open to critical self-reflection and offer water providers something other than run-of-the-mill rhetoric about the need for more market-oriented management.

Public water is different to private water, and Gwopa must figure out where it stands on this debate if it is to make an innovative contribution to water policy and practice.
Ultimately, the vast majority of the world's water systems remain in public hands, and many more are being put back into government hands. What we really need is 20 Gwopas to engage with this reality; for now, one effective one will do.

• David McDonald is co-director of the municipal services project, and professor of global development studies at Queen's University in Canada.

Source : The Guardian                                                                     ------------------------------------- 


It is not enough to criticise the privatisation of services such as the provision of water, electricity and health care, says David MacDonald in a video for the Municipal Services Project, one has to critically evaluate alternative public service initiatives.