Read the Press release of the Europarliament after the adoption of the resolution:
The European Commission’s response to the first EU citizens’ initiative (ECI) petition, on the “Right2Water”, lacks ambition and failed to meet the demands of the organizers, said MEPs in a resolution voted on Tuesday. ECIs enable citizens to ask the Commission to propose laws in areas within its competence, if they can muster at least one million signatures from at least a quarter of EU member states.
The Right2Water citizens’ initiative was the first successful example of this democratic mechanism. Ownership and management of water services are clearly key concerns for citizens that cannot be ignored”, said lead MEP Lynn Boylan (GUE/NGL, IE), whose report was approved by 363 votes to 96, with 261 abstentions. “It is pitiful that the Commission has not come forward with legislative proposals enshrining water as a human right and a legal requirement across the European Union (…). Profits should not be made on public goods such as water”, she added.
Commission “limits itself to reiterating existing commitments”
MEPs regret that the European Commission communication responding to the “Right2Water” ECI and a European Parliament hearing in February 2014 “lacks ambition, does not meet the specific demands made in the ECI, and limits itself to reiterating existing commitments”.
“If successful and widely supported ECIs (…) are neglected by the Commission, the EU as such will lose credibility in the eyes of citizens”, MEPs say.
They call on the Commission to table legislative proposals, including a revision of the EU Water Framework Directive if appropriate, in order to recognise that affordable access to water is a basic human right.
MEPs point out that EU member states have a duty to ensure that access to water is guaranteed for all, regardless of the supplier and that suppliers provide safe drinking water and improve sanitation.
Keep water out of trade deals
MEPs stipulate that production, distribution and treatment of water and sanitation services must remain excluded from the Concessions Directive in any future revision Moreover, the special character of water and sanitation services, such as production, distribution and treatment, makes it imperative to exclude them from any trade agreements the EU is negotiating or considering, they add.
Note In February 2014, organisers of the “Right2Water” campaign attended a hearing with the Environment Committee, in association with the Development, Internal market and Petitions committees. The ECI collected 1,884,790 signatures.
The initiators urged the EU Commission to guarantee access to water and sanitation as a human right, and give a legal undertaking that water services will not be liberalised in the EU. MEPs shared the view that access to water is a basic human right, but some pointed out that rules on providing drinkable water remain within the remit of EU member states.
Procedure: Non-legislative resolution
The stubborn and aggressive imposition of privatisation by Troika goes against the will of Greek citizens and represents a direct attack on democracy
Article by Satiko Kishimoto (TNI) and Olivier Hoedeman (CEO)
The requirement to sell off €50 billion in public assets is one of the most controversial aspects of the ‘agreement’ that Eurozone countries and the Troika forced on the Greek government during mid-July’s “night of shame”.
Details of exactly what Greece is required to privatise have now emerged with the leaking of the “Memorandum of Understanding for a three-year ESM programme” prepared by the Troika’s International Monetary Fund, European Commission and European Central Bank. [1] The leaked document lists 23 state assets, ranging from airports to service utilities, and presents precise steps and timelines for privatisation.
It comes as a shock that this list includes two large public water companies: Athens Water Supply & Sewerage S.A (EYDAP) and Thessaloniki Water Supply & Sewerage S.A. (EYATH), which provide drinking water for the country’s two biggest cities. The Troika had insisted on water privatisation in an earlier memorandum, but strong public opposition had blocked this proposal.
In June 2014 the Council of State, the country’s highest administrative court, ruled that transferring a controlling stake in Athens’ public water utility EYDAP to private hands was unconstitutional because of the responsibility of the state to protect citizens’ fundamental right to health. [2] The new Memorandum foresees the sale of 11% of EYDAP shares, which seems minimal at face value, but given that 38.7% of EYDAP´s shares are already owned by private companies and individuals, it would leave 49.7% of the utility in private hands.
As for Thessaloniki, a non-binding referendum was held in May 2014, resulting in a 98% vote against water privatisation. This citizen-led initiative mobilised 218,002 voters and sent a crystal clear message rejecting the planned sale of 51% of EYATH shares to private investors (French water multinational Suez and Israel’s state-owned Merokot had shown interest). The leaked Memorandum now orders the liquidation of 23% of state-owned shares; knowing that another 26% are already in private hands, this would make the company 49% private.
In both cases, the Troika is demanding a selloff at the maximum level possible without directly conflicting with the court ruling. George Archontopoulos, the president of the Thessaloniki water workers’ union, fears that private investors “will be given management control as a present”. Therefore “whether it is 49% or 51%, we oppose further privatization of the company”, says Archontopoulos.
Rightly so because there are numerous examples of so-called public-private partnerships in which water multinationals own just under half of the shares but control the utility de facto. An ironic example is that of Germany´s capital Berlin, which sold off 49.9% of its water company (BWB) in 1999. Despite minority ownership, the private companies controlled management and were guaranteed high profits through secret contracts. In 2013, Berlin’s water was taken back in public hands, after almost 15 years of unpopular privatisation. As reported by The Guardian last week, the push by the German government and the EU institutions to privatise Greek water starkly contradicts the trend in the rest of Europe where cities are “remunicipalising” water after failed privatisation experiments. Germany’s water sector is overwhelmingly publicly-owned and publicly-managed and the German population enjoys high-quality water services provided by these public utilities.
Enough harm has been done already. The public water companies of Athens and Thessaloniki have been on the Athens stock exchange for nearly 15 years. Since then the number of employees in Thessaloniki decreased from 700 to 229. This is a very small number of water workers for a city over one million inhabitants and a 2,330-km piped network. In a comparable city like Amsterdam (1.3 million served population, 2,700 km network), the public water company employs 1,700 staff. Similar cuts have taken place in Athens.
The water utilities of both Athens and Thessaloniki are modern and well-functioning and there is no logical rationale for privatisation. Despite the severe social crisis in Greece, EYDAP and EYATH have been providing high quality, essential services at one of the most affordable tariffs in Europe. The companies are efficient and have healthy finances.
The Troika´s insistence on privatisation is driven by misguided ideology. For one, the sale of the water utilities shares will yield insignificant earnings when considering the big picture.
Worse, handing control over essential services to profit-driven multinationals presents serious risks for the most vulnerable among Greece’s crisis-hit population. The stubborn and aggressive imposition of privatisation goes against the will of Greek citizens and represents a direct attack on democracy. It is scandalous that the European Commission, one of the three institutions forming the Troika, ignores once again its EU treaty obligation to remain neutral when it comes to ownership of water services.[3]
[1] The document is available via the website of German Green MEP Sven Giegold: Greece Memorandum of Understanding for a three year ESM programme https://www.sven-giegold.de/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/MoU-draft-11-August.pdf
ANNEXES 1 HRDAF Asset Development Plan 30 July 2015 https://www.sven-giegold.de/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Privatisation-Programme.pdf
HRDAF Government Pending Actions 30 July 2015 https://www.sven-giegold.de/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Government-Pending-Actions-final.pdf
The list of privatisation projects is in the first annex.
[2] The ruling happened after 27.3 % of the shares were had been transferred to the privatisation fund HRADF in January 2014, to be sold to private investors. The court blocked the planned transfer of another 34.03% to HRADF.
[3] ¨EU Commission forces crisis-hit countries to privatise water ¨, October 17th 2012; https://corporateeurope.org/pressreleases/2012/eu-commission-forces-crisis-hit-countries-privatise-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.
]]>Are Greece’s European Partners aware that the money they have deposited in the EU Cohesion Fund will be used by the Greek Government to subsidize private entrepreneurs?
The modernization of the computer systems of EYATh will cost some € 2 million and will be paid by the Greek taxpayers despite the fact that the company will soon be transferred to private ownership. It was inevitable that such a procedure would draw the attention of the District Attorney and is already under examination. But this case is dwarfed by a more recent procedure according to which the Greek Government will use more than € 100 million of taxpayers’ money and funds of the EU Cohesion Fund to construct or modernize Water Supply and Sewerage Infrastructures on behalf of EYATh; the new (private) owners of the company will benefit from such without having paid a single cent towards their cost.
Today, only a few hours after celebrating Greece’s entry in the EU Presidency, one can only wonder whether all those who attended the party in Athens, and even more importantly the taxpayers in the rest of EU, are aware that their money is given for free to private prospectors. Not only did the Greek Government undertake to proceed with the construction of such infrastructures it also agreed to continue paying for these even after the transfer of the majority of the EYATh shares (and of course its management) to private prospectors.
The price to be paid by the future private owners of EYATh is some € 110 million, i.e. only a small fraction larger than the sums already mentioned. By paying this the new owners will get for free the use of such infrastructures which, among others, include upgrades in the Thessaloniki Biological Treatment Plant, already run by Joint Venture SUEZ-AKTOR (the future owners of EYATH) or other installations run by Castor SA (a subsidiary of AKTOR).
All facts above have already been made public through the webpage of SAPW. SAPW has already prepared the blueprints and issued an invitation to a public tender for such works. The contractor will be paid by SAPW using money given by the Greek State and subsidies of the EU Cohesion Fund. Such a procedure was normal in the past when EYATh was a public institution and even when the Greek State owned the majority of its shares. Now when EYATh is being turned over to the private such a procedure cannot be deemed acceptable.
The sum of € 100+ million is being spent as follows
€ 4,9 million are to be used for building and connection projects in the Biological Treatment Plant (run by castor SA, as has already been mentioned), another € 44 million will be used for the construction of a second branch to the main sewers lineage line, € 17,7 million has been used for building a Thermal Drying Sewage Treatment Unit, while the tender for the Building of an Extension to the Water Treatment Unit (€ 36,5 million) is still pending.
All the above will be to the benefit of the prospected private owners of EYATh. The Greek Government seems to be in a hurry to proceed with the transfer as soon as possible despite the fact that a Council of State Decision (issued on an Appeal against such transaction) orders the discontinuation of the procedure (the Decision has not been formally published yet).
One wonders whether the EU and the EU Cohesion Fund are willing to press the Greek Government towards stopping to subsidize private companies, especially as Greece (i.e. its taxpayers) have been penalized in the past for similar acts of its governments.
]]>The tender for the selling of Thessaloniki water company, EYATH, which takes place under media silence by (private) TV stations enters now in its second phase, after the TAIPED excluded “Citizens for Water“(the effort of cooperative management by Thessalonians together with the union workers). Mr. Stavridis, former president of the EYDAP (Athens Water Company) and now head of TAIPED (or HDRAF, the fund where all public assets were transferred in order to be sold), who is among the most eager supporters of free economy, especially when it is implemented by creating private monopolies under the supervision of “regulators”, in a monumental, for the lack of any legal or other documentation or explanation, letter ‘informs’ in an acquiescent tone that the Union’s proposal does not “pass” to the next phase. In the next phase, however, passes the French multinational Suez along with the even more willing Mr. Bobolas and even the public (!) Israeli company Mekorot’s joint venture with Mr. Apostolopoulos. The Union has already filed a complaint, as it was expected, and now we wait.
We wait furthermore for the implementation of the decisions of 17 municipalities from the region of Thessaloniki to hold local referendums and the signing of the relevant notorious presidential decree which enables this procedure, a decree which is characteristically “slow” in its legislative adventure, from Callicrates until today – how many years is it? – While overnight the institutional “father” of the Greek people signed with a stroke of a pen the abolition of ERT. Following the announced privatization of water, a few days ago, ” black” fell on all television, radio, internet and satellite programs of the public broadcaster.
It is a sad development in our effort to inform our fellow citizens over the dangers of privatization, since we were expecting the projection of a relevant documentary of the series “EXANDAS” by Y. Avgeropoulos, in the preparation of which we participated. This development is dangerous for another delicate reason, which falls in the category of our engagement with the wider concept of the commons. The archive of ERT, the ark of our modern cultural history, it is inconceivable for us to become an object of vulgar trade and such an act would signify the ultimate enclosure, beyond that of our natural collective goods such as water, of our collective intellect and our cultural heritage.
In both cases what we see is a palinode. The government blames the Troika and the European Commission and the Commission washes its hands regarding these decisions. I want to denounce the current government and especially their assistant political parties, who are opposed, as they claim, at the sale of EYATH (and the abolition of ERT) that they are moving on their own responsibility and to a future time hopefully liability in this sale, since there is an official letter from the European Commission that says they are not pushing our country in this direction. Why the Commission wrote this letter? They know that the pressure to privatize water services is unlawful, since they are bound by the TFEU to be neutral on issues of management of water services (Article 345 TFEU). So if the government is pressed, they have to admit it in public, to come forward and say that the European Commission is lying and we can all support them and go to the European courts. If the government is not pressed and simply lacks rationality and an understanding of the concept of public interest, there is another reason why they shouldn’t want the sale of water services. In the case of Athens even if sold at 350 million, ie the market value of our shares, the public sector’s shares, to the water company, tomorrow instead of collecting, the government should instead pay, since the company has receivables from the State, local authorities, etc., which mount up to 1.2 billion! (See Annual Financial Report 2012). As for the European Commission, they have no legitimacy to move forward with the privatization in the countries of the South, when we already have in our hands the first historically successful European Citizens’ Initiative right2water. Instead of playing hide and seek, they would do well to open directly processes to institutionalize the human right to access to clean water and hygiene, which was adopted in 2010 by the UN, as the proposed legislative initiative by the citizens suggest and abandon their desires for establishing a water market in Europe, desires rooting in the Steering group of Mr Barnier, a body composed of high ranking executives of the sector’s multinationals. The institutional role of Mr Barnier, although he fails to grasp it, is the European public interest and speculation on the basic needs of European citizens do not reflect it in the least.
Whether it is about our physical commons such as water, or our collective cultural heritage, one thing is certain. Each enclosure is directly or indirectly against the fundamental human right to life. Commons are not owned by any temporary elected representative.
Regardless of whether one agrees or not with the above, there is one point on which everyone would meet me upon: It is the responsibility of the Politeia (State) (Greek and European) to give an institutional way-out at the society’s will . If it cannot perform it, we have an ontological crisis as a political society, far more destructive than the much discussed economical.
Sign for your water in Greece and Europe.
Some figures: EYATH is a company with a monopoly on the supply of water in Thessaloniki area. It has profitability in 2012 of 24 million euros, available cash 33 million euros, equity of 135 million euros and annual income 74 million. The value of the stock is 220 million euros and the 75% that is held by TAIPED if sold in the market value which is 165 million euros, the investor will get his money back in six years and will obtain ownership of a company with monopoly rights. It is an investment that with current water prices has an 18% annual return on capital employed (33/135) and if the tarrifs are increased the return yields off.
Why “no” to privatization: What are the implications in our lives from the privatization of water services; What does international experience show? • sudden price increases of 250% – 300% with the partial privatization of EYATH. Prices x12 times in Bucharest over 13 years. Pacos de Ferreira Portugal 400% increase and 6% increase each year.• Degradation of water quality and uneven access to water services. In Walkerton (Ontario) Canada seven people lost their lives drinking water with bacteria E coli. Extensive infections with Suez in Johannesburg (South Africa). • Incomplete network maintenance & breaches of contractual terms for investments. In France, funding water services are still made by the public sector at 88%. In Argentina, the government terminated the contract with Suez for breach of its contractual obligations (maintenance and expansion of the network). • Monopolistic practices and cartels. The EU conducted research at SUEZ, VEOLIA and SAUR, for trusts in France (2012). In England companies right from the stage of the competition do not compete with each other and take to competitions without rival. • Lack of accountability and secret agreements. Most contracts remain secret eluding anyone control. In Berlin, the VEOLIA and RWE, in 1999, had demanded a written guarantee large profit was kept secret until the public in 2011 by referendum demanded to publicize the terms of the contract. Wherevere applied, water privatization has failed.
The international trend is the recovery of water services by public bodies (France, Canada, Argentina, Hungary). The Italians prevented water privatization with a referendum (2011). In the Netherlands water services is by law public (2004). In Germany, except in the case of Berlin, where developments of remunicipalization are underway, water management is done by public bodies.
*Ms Kanellopoulou is a founding member of the Initiative for the non privatization of water in Greece savegreekwater.org
]]>Note: As an independent forum, the Institute does not express any opinions of its own. The views expressed in the article are the sole responsibility of the author.
]]>
Republication from Corporate Europe Observatory (March 20th 2013)
The European Commission has in recent weeks gone on a PR offensive in response to growing criticism of its pro-privatization agenda for the water sector. The criticism centers around the water privatization conditions attached to the Troika’s rescue packages for Greece and Portugal, and the proposed EU concessions directive, which could lead to increased privatization pressure on public water municipalities across Europe.
The concessions directive, which has the stated object of opening markets and eliminating “discrepancies among national regimes”, would end the exemption that has so far existed for drinking water supply and for the first time bring it under the rules of the EU’s single market. Previous attempts to bring water under single market rules failed due to resistance from civil society and MEPs opposed to water becoming a commodity, but this time the European Parliament has been less vigilant. The directive would not directly force municipalities to privatize, but could lead to ‘privatization through the back door’. Municipalities who have some form of private participation in their water supply, even a small part, would have to offer their water contracts for EU-wide bidding. This would give private water multinationals like Suez and Veolia new opportunities to expand. All of this has sparked strong public concern in Germany, Austria, The Netherlands and elsewhere. The concerns were shared from left to right and even the governing German conservative party, the CDU, passed a resolution at its congress rejecting the concessions directive and calling for water to be exempted. German Chancellor Merkel however, has so far ignored these concerns. The concessions directive is currently in its last phase of decision-making, a so-called trialogue procedure involving the Commission, Parliament and the Council of EU member states.
The Commission got increasingly worried after its water privatization push was featured in widely watched TV programs in Germany and The Netherlands. Before the European Parliament’s vote on the directive in January, Internal Market Commissioner Barnier had accused opponents of ”misinformation” and of a “deliberately erroneous reading” of the proposed directive. In February, the attacks against the critics were complemented by a charm offensive. Barnier and Environment Commissioner Potocnik issued a joint press release, stating that the Commission “does not have a policy of forcing Member States to privatize water services.” The Commissioners claimed that the concessions directive will “not lead, under any circumstances, to imposed privatization of water services.”
But this was a clever way to sidestep criticism, which did not speak about direct “imposed” privatization but about a very dangerous first move in that direction, a charge which remains unanswered. Later in February, Commissioner Barnier announced in interviews in German and Austrian newspapers that he is willing to change the directive on specific points of concern for the water sectors of these two countries. Concretely he offered to change a clause in the directive that would see a smaller number of water utilities covered by the directive. This, obviously, implicitly means that Barnier admits that there are indeed reasons to fear that the concessions directive could lead to privatization through the backdoor.
But Barnier’s offer for a limited amendment to the directive is far too little to make a real difference. The German TV program Monitor last week looked at the case of the city of Karlsruhe, which has publicly supplied water with limited private participation. Also after the changes announced by Barnier, Karlsruhe would have to offer its water supply concession for EU-wide bidding, Matthias Maier of Stadtwerke Karlsruhe told Monitor. “Privatization would endanger the quality of the water and surpluses would no longer be reinvested in the water supply system but go to shareholders of the water multinationals”, Matthias Maier explained. Green MEP Heidi Ruhle told Monitor that “Barnier’s proposal is nothing new. It is a smokescreen to comfort public opinion”. The goal of the directive, she stressed, remains the same: “market opening and increased pressure towards privatization”.
Barnier’s claims that the Commission is not promoting privatization are also undermined by the fact that the Commission has been bullish in its defense of the Troika’s demands for water privatization in Greece and Portugal. The water companies of Thessaloniki and Athens, Greece’s two largest cities, and Portugal’s national water company are for sale as a result of Troika demands. In response to a letter from NGOs asking Commissioner Olli Rehn how the Commission (as part of the Troika) can justify imposing privatization on these crisis-hit countries, the Commission last autumn explicitly stated that it sees privatization as the way forward. When NGOs sent a new letter asking how this fits with its obligation under the EU treaty to be neutral on water privatization, the Commission failed to respond. After numerous reminders and waiting for five months, NGOs submitted a complaint to the Ombudsman, who is now pushing the Commission for a response to the letter.
Barnier’s statements have failed to impress civil society groups, who continue to campaign for water to be exempted from the concessions directive. This is indeed the only effective way to prevent the directive leading to privatisation pressures. Over 1,3 million people have now signed the European Citizens Initiative for water as a human right, which explicitly calls for “water supply and management of water resources not to be subject to ‘internal market rules’ and “that water services are excluded from liberalisation”. The only way to respect the wish of EU citizens would be to put the Concessions Directive on halt or agree to exempt water from the directive. The battle over the concessions directive is therefore a major test case for democracy in Europe.
[box] An open letter to MEPs was sent by several Spanish organizations and the European Water Movement with the occasion of Suez’s invitation to some MEPs to visit their installations at Barcelona. The letter explains why the acceptance of such an invitation from their part is not “just a nice occasion for a wonderful trip to beautiful Barcelona”, but a crucial support against the peoples will to those who lobby at EU level for the commercialization of water and a new wave of privatizations in all debt ridden countries, at the same time when more than 1.200.000 Europeans have signed the European Citizens Initiative for the acknowledgment of water as a human right by the EU and the abandonment of these policies. In their letter they explain all open legal disputes and specific problems that the company’s actions have created.[/box]
[/vc_column_text] [/vc_column] [/vc_row] [vc_row el_position=”last”] [vc_column] [vc_column_text el_position=”first last”]
Respected Parliamentarians of the European Union,
As you will be aware, Suez-Agbar have invited you to visit, on 1st March, water installations in the Barcelona region. We would strongly urge you to both send this letter to the members of your party and to not take up the invitation. The fact is that the planned programme is biased, failing to provide alternative views from all interested parties throughout Spanish society, such as NGOs. These elements and opinions are essential, especially when dealing with public services and the environment.
We are aware of the existence of more than 15,000 lobbyists, from large companies and the financial sector, which bombard the European Parliament daily with their demands, so that their interests can be incorporated into European legislation. This changes the very principles of public policy; which effectively ceases to respond to general public interest to serve private interests, thereby producing a misgovernment of public functions and putting the very basis of democracy in danger.
In the case of water and of the management of this basic and fundamental service, this type of action puts fluvial ecosystems, social cohesion and human dignity at risk. As well as this, we find, paradoxically, that members of the interested party have established themselves as expert-advisors in the field, becoming the arbitrators of their own actions and thereby turning public institutions into accomplices in this horrific circle of self-interest. Is Suez-Agbar really able to be objective in their advice when, in 2012 alone, they made some 2.450 million Euros in profits? Throughout the course of history, when has the privatisation of public services ever had the support of the general public?
Analysing the programme we would like to point out:
– The visit to Suez-Agbar’s centre of operations. It is important that you should know that a legal judgement in 2010 decided that the management of Suez-Agbar was illegitimate for not being in possession of the respective administration service contract, as well as all related problem which that fact presented for the public. There is also the possibility that some 20 municipalities of the metropolitan region will find themselves in the same situation. In order to correct this, the Metropolitan Area of Barcelona (city administration) decided to create a new, combined company and award it, arbitrarily, to Suez-Agbar. The process has been condemned in no fewer than seven complaints to the Administrative-Contentious Jurisdiction, with one of these filed by the Generalitat of Catalonia itself, the autonomic government, for encroachment on government powers, and others for concerns over companies violating the free bidding process and the infringement of public procurement, which has presently ceased. In the face of such impropriety, several public platforms have presented reports to the anti-corruption prosecutor so that the local council of Barcelona, Greater Barcelona and Suez-Agbar are investigated for possible misdemeanours.
-Visit to the water installations. It is important to note that the desalination plant of El Prat de Llobregat, as well as the municipal purification plant of Baix Llobregat, the hydraulic barrier against saltwater seepage and the reverse osmosis plant of Sant Joan Despi, to mention just a few, were all financed with funds from the Catalonian Generalitat and European cohesion funds. Suez-Agbar has not invested a single euro in the above infrastructures. Furthermore, the Generalitat of Catalonia has lodged legal complaints to affirm that the Sant Joan Despi plant is owned and run by the Generalitat, not by the municipal administration and certainly not by Suez-Agbar. It is surprising to see that infrastructures funded with European cohesion funds, the purpose of which was to fund “projects for public investment with the purpose of improving the environment,” have been converted, in just a few years, into infrastructures to make greater profits for water multinationals.
-The debate over water policies within the EU. Firstly, it should be clarified that, (as previously stated in a letter to the Vice President of the Commission, Olli Rehn), the measures to access the “bailout” dictated by the Troika, (CEB, EC and IMF) relating to the privatisation of water in Greece, (Athens and Thessalonika) and Portugal (Aguas de Portugal) suppose a violation of the neutrality that the EU should be demonstrating in the light of publicly or privately owned infrastructures, as well as the management of those water services (Article 345 of the TFEU and Art.17 of the Directive 2006/123/CE relative to the internal market). Secondly, it should be remembered that the Italian public organised a constitutionally binding referendum in which more than 95% opposed the privatisation of water services, voting ‘yes’ to the public administration of the same, and for the elimination of profit-making in its management. However, incomprehensibly, a letter from Mario Draghi and Jean-Claude Trichet to Mario Monti rejected the right of the Italian people and stopped the implementation of the said referendum. Finally we would like to put forward our rejection of the document, ‘A Quality Framework for Services of General Interest in Europe’, which for the first time has deregulated the water sector, as well as social services and the health sector. A document which demonstrates a manifest intent to promote Public-Private Collaborations throughout all sectors, even though numerous examples have shown that these collaborations do not lead to an improvement in quality; instead, simply raising the cost for the public, reducing public capital as well as administration and causing devastating effects on the aquatic ecosystem. There is more than enough proof to show that the market should not be involved in the management of public services and common public assets. What actually occurs is a withholding of the information necessary to run the service, bringing with it a lack of continuity at the level of public service, producing a virtual resignation of responsibilities in the administration. In summary, it is a democratic plundering of finances of the public, as well as every family affected.
But we do not want to miss the opportunity to talk about other aspects of Spain’s water problems. Commissioner Rehn’s response informed us that “privatisation can start only once an adequate regulatory framework exists, one which avoids the abuse of private monopolies. At the same time, public access to the basic public infrastructure must be guaranteed.” These are fine words, but in Spain, there is no regulatory framework. It is more correct to speak of a constant deregulation of the administrations by the private sector, introducing, for example, “concession fees”, tempting mayors and mayoresses to fill their depleted municipal coffers. The charging of concession fees and practices also, of course, promote corruption in the tendering and management of the water services (open investigations can be found in these links to cases relative to Andalusia, Galicia, Asturia
We cannot fail to mention also the state of the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive. It is important to note that Spain is very behind in its delivery of Hydrological Plans, the majority of which have not been presented to the Commission. However, it is worth noting that Catalonia did, in fact, deliver its plan of the Internal Basins, thanks to the public management of the sector and the participation of the public. The pressures caused by diverse water uses (agricultural, hydro-electric, urban supply companies) have been a factor in this major delay, which will doubtlessly incur national EU sanctions, due to the difficulty of the incorporation of effective measures which contribute to good water conditions to be achieved by 2015, one of the principle objectives of the WFD. Another clear example of the lack of continuity which privatisation provokes in the management of water supply is the interference with ecological systems; for instance, the recent privatisation of the public group Aigues Ter-Llobregat through Acciona has created an over-exploitation of the river Ter, because it is the most profitable water source, highlighting that the environment always comes second to the needs of those seeking profit.
Bearing all this in mind, we urge you to take part in the meeting to be held in Brussels on the 19 March, a meeting organised by the general public. It will provide an opportunity to listen to the voices of the people who ask, and have been asking now for some time, for an effective protection of public services, which are vulnerable to the markets and those seeking to exploit them for the purpose of profit. They will ask for the protection of aquatic ecosystems, the planet’s fountain of life. We beseech you to join with the people of Portugal, Greece, Italy,
Yours sincerely
Asamblea Paz-Fama-Vistabella/Ciudadanos por el Derecho a la Ciudad (Murcia),
Asociación en Defensa del Territorio del Aljarafe – ADTA,
Asociación Española de Operadores Públicos de Abastecimiento y Saneamiento – AEOPAS,
Coordinadora en Defensa de la Gestión Pública del Agua en Jerez,
Coordinadora Provincial contra la Privatización del Agua en Cádiz,
Federación española de Ingeniería Sin Fronteras,
Fundación Nueva Cultura del Agua – FNCA,
Plataforma Aigua és vida (Catalunya),
Plataforma Apemsa no se vende (Puerto de Santa María),
Plataforma contra la especulación urbanística y medioambiental de Candeleda,
Plataforma contra la Privatización del Canal de Isabel II (Madrid),
Plataforma por el Agua como Servicio Público de Laguna de Duero,
Red Agua Pública de Aragón – RAPA,
Red Andaluza de la Nueva Cultura del Agua
Xúquer Viu
[/vc_column_text] [/vc_column] [/vc_row]
]]>[box] Success for the ECI (European Citizens Initiative) on affordable and non-privatized access to clean water. This legislative initiative, an institution which was adopted at the Treaty of Lisbon, is the first successful attempt to collect among the European citizens 1,000,000 official signatures, (with passport number or ID), so as to call on the European Commission to initiate a legislative process. (Before of the implementation of ECI, only the commission had the right to initiate legislation at the European Parliament.) [/box]
[box]Perhaps now, that the Europeans have spoken up and declared, despite the technical and legal setbacks, that they do not want the water market creation and commercialization of their precious resource, the unelected Commissioners Barnier and Oli Rehn will begin to listen also to civil society apart from their friends of the Steering Group, consisting of executives of water corporations. Unless they regard themselves, emperors.[/box]
[box type=”warning”] Although the 1,000,000 signatures were collected, apparently they are supposed to consist of a minimum of signatures from 7 different countries… Greece has yet to catch this minimum which in our case is 16,500. Many have contacted us because they were not able to sign electronically. We alerted the organizers of the European Citizens Initiative about this so as to urge the EU In order to solve the technical problems since the software used for the process is theirs… As if it were not enough that civil society is required to run such an expensive and intricate in legal proceedings, procedure, they make whatever humanly possible to complicate it further.. Another reason for us to skyrocket signatures from Greece.[/box]
[/vc_column_text] [vc_column_text width=”1/1″ el_position=”first last”]
EPSU Press communication
11 February 2013
“One million signatures for Water as a Human Right !”
(Brussels, 11 February)
Yesterday, the first up and running European Citizens Initiative (ECI) ‘Water is a Human Right’ made history as also being the first ECI in the history of the European Union to have collected over 1 million signatures.
Anne-Marie Perret, President of the Citizens Committee says “Reaching this important milestone, with one Million EU citizens agreeing that water and sanitation are human rights, is a great success. We appreciate the support of so many and will continue campaigning to pass a strong message to the European Commission. We have also managed to overcome the start up problems, as well as the legal and technical barriers forced upon us by the European Commission and Member States.”
The ECI “Water is a Human Right” has been a success not just because more than 1 million people have signed but in terms of creating a real European debate. 2013 is the European Year of citizenship and we have manage to get more than 1.5 million visits to our website the month of January only. It has contributed to creating a space for a European debate in which many citizens are engaging.
The ECI will continue to collect signatures to ensure that the voices of as many people in as many different countries as possible are heard. On March 22rd we will celebrate World Water Day with well over a million voices against liberalization of water, and for the implementation of the human right to water and sanitation in the EU.
For more information: Pablo Sanchez, [email protected] 0032 (0) 474 62 66 33
EPSU is the European Federation of Public Service Unions. It is the largest federation of the ETUC and comprises 8 million public service workers from over 275 trade unions; EPSU organizes workers in the energy, water and waste sectors, health and social services and local and national administration, in all European countries including in the EU’s Eastern Neighborhood. EPSU is the recognized regional organization of Public Services International (PSI).
[/vc_column_text] [vc_column_text width=”1/1″ el_position=”first last”]
[box type=”info”] The legal basis of the citizens’ initiative is set out in Article 11, Paragraph 4 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Article 24, paragraph 1 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Both articles were newly introduced with the Treaty of Lisbon.[/box]
[/vc_column_text]
]]>Watch the question and the answer in the following video. In the second, longer video available only in Greek one can listen to what is translated in Greek by the professional translator of the event, for those that were wearing headphones and listened to the interventions in Greek, and those who watched the event on live streaming via Internet.[/box]
More info on the moratorium against Suez Veolia Saur here.
]]>