In the Valle de San Felix, the purest water in Chile runs from 2 rivers, fed by 2 glaciers. Water is a most precious resource, and wars will be fought for it. Indigenous farmers use the water, there is no unemployment, and they provide the second largest source of income for the area.

Click to read more ...

Quote “Open the way for private companies to build dams, desalination plants and other infrastructure through arrangements with a newly created Water Commission” The Courier Mail 21/4/06”

Click to read more ...

The Federal Government has called for a public debate on whether the private sector should play a greater role in providing water services. The parliamentary secretary with responsibility for water policy, Malcolm Turnbull, has released a discussion paper on the issue at a national water conference in Sydney today.

Click to read more ...

John Brumby [Victorian Minister for the Department of Treasury and Finance Department of Innovation, Industry and Regional Development] on Privatisation:-“The SEC is a valuable and profitable asset paid for and owned by Victorians. It is held in trust by the Government for present and future Australians. Each year, after servicing it’s debts, it pays a dividend of over $250 million [actually $314 million for 1993/94 ]to the people of Victoria. These dividends are used to build our schools and hospitals, run our trams and buses, and train and equip our police and emergency services. Without the profits of the SEC, and other publicly owned companies such as the Gas & Fuel and Melbourne Water, the only way Victorians would be able to afford these essential services would be through higher taxes”.

Click to read more ...

Finally, the Australian constitution allows, under the foreign affairs power, the Commonwealth parliament to pass laws consistent with a particular treaty - in this case the AUSFTA - which over-rides state powers otherwise protected by the Australian constitution. One impact of this would be the potential for an agreement resembling the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) to be brought in. Such laws could threaten many state-based public services because under the MAI companies can sue for loss of future profits in the event of a trade barrier including such socially beneficial barriers as environmental safeguards, banning of carcinogenic substances, or the non-provision of subsidies for foreign companies on an equal footing.

Click to read more ...

Water is the original source of life, that inescapable requirement of every living creature. That it be freely accessible to all is not simply a desirable situation, but an unquestionable one promised to all citizens in India through our Constitution. However, in Bangalore, moves are being made to ensure that this access is limited to only those who can afford to pay for it. The Greater Bangalore Water Supply and Sanitation Project, currently being implemented by the Government of Karnataka with an uncharacteristic zeal, is slated to privatise the distribution of water in 8 Municipalities of the city. This project is but a backdoor entry into the whole of the city and eventually every teeming metropolis in the country. It has been designed to put into the hands of a few mega-corporations, the critical task of distributing water to every nook and cranny of the areas under its purview.

Click to read more ...

"Today, companies like France’s Suez are rushing to privatise water, already a $400 billion global business. They are betting that water will be to the 21st century what oil was to the 20th" (Fortune Magazine, May 15, 2000 p 55). What if our government signed a legally binding international agreement which meant that water had to be treated purely as a traded commercial good? What if the rules of this agreement meant that regulation to ensure equitable access and affordable pricing of water services could be challenged by transnational corporations as a barrier to free trade? What if the agreement meant that governments had to open up the funding of publicly owned water services to privatisation by transnational corporations?

Click to read more ...

Cashed-up superannuation funds and financial institutions see PPPs as relatively low risk investments, with assured revenue flows from government over a twenty to thirty year period. With the promise of a steady flow of revenue and a relatively low risk investment structure, the private sector cannot be blamed for taking a strong interest in PPPs. A toll-highway project in Nova Scotia illustrates one reason why they might be so interested:

Click to read more ...