The Council replies: Letters to the editor
Maude Barlow's response to John Langford
The following letter was written in response to John Langford's review of Blue Convenant in the August 6th edition of The Australian
John Langford has strong views about my new book, Blue Covenant, The Global Water Crisis and the Coming Battle for the Right to Water. While I don't expect us to have a meeting of minds, especially given the fact that John Langford is closely associated with the private water industry in Australia, I would like to clarify several points.
First, Langford says that I am against pricing for water. This is not true. I do believe we will have to implement a system of water pricing that reflects the true cost of delivering safe clean water as a way to encourage conservation. However, I would warn that any pricing regime must be based on three conditions: that the fee collected be for the service, not the water itself, which must be seen as a commons; that it must be collected by a not-for-profit government agency, not a for-profit company, so that fees collected can be put back into infrastructure repair and conservation programs; and that a block pricing system be used so that no-one is denied water because of inability to pay.
Second, Langford dismisses my criticisms of the record of the private water corporations operating in Sydney and Adelaide. The source for this material is from a powerful report called The Water Barons, by the highly respected International Consortium of Investigative Journalists of the U.S.- based Center for Public Integrity. The team of reporters condemned these two water privatization schemes, citing impeccable sources.
Finally, Langford asserts that I am against technological innovation in finding solutions to the water crisis and see no role for the private sector. Again this is not true. What I am opposed to is the growing corporate control of every facet of water by a water cartel that now includes the water re-use industry and makes a profit from delivering urban water supplies that could just as efficiently be delivered by a not-for-profit government agency. It is dangerous to allow for-profit corporations to dictate policy over dwindling water resources, something that is happening all over the world.
There are major problems with the growing corporate control of water. If corporations control water, there will be little incentive to conserve or protect water sources when the same companies are making huge profits from scarce and dirty water. As well, if water is put on the open market for sale to the highest bidder, only the rich will be able to buy clean water. This is already the reality in much of the global South. Finally, in a world where water is controlled for profit, nature will have to fend for itself. We are already taking far more water from nature than we are putting back. Nowhere is this fact more stark than in Australia.
A debate about the ownership and control of Australia' s water is overdue. Water is a commons, a public trust, and a human right. It is time to enshrine these principles into law.
Maude Barlow
Ottawa
Canada
