 |
||||||||||||||||||
|
The World Water Forum (WWF) is an international event held every three years by the World Water Council (WWC), a policy think tank run by the World Bank; the major water corporations, such as Vivendi and Suez; and the development and aid agencies and water ministries of a number of First World governments. The World Water Council has set itself up as a kind of "Global High Command" of water, determining what will happen to the earth's dwindling supply of fresh water and who will have the right to make these decisions. The 1st World Water Forum was held in Marrakech in 1997; the 2nd in The Hague in 2000; and the 3rd in Kyoto in 2003. The 4th World Water Forum is scheduled for Mexico City in March 2006. Civil society groups from around the world are already preparing for this gathering. The World Water Forum has all the appearance of a United Nations conference. The host government puts out the welcoming mat for the thousands of participants who attend the forum from all over the world, providing choice conference venues, concerts, festivals, food and sophisticated transportation services. Workshops and panels on every aspect of water are held and the convenors produce their own "theme statements" which are pulled together into official recommendations by the WWF for future action. The forum hosts a ministerial meeting with senior politicians and bureaucrats from around the world; they produce their own "ministerial statement" which carries great weight back in their home countries and at the United Nations. In reality, however, the WWF is not an official UN conference, although there is some UN participation at the forum. In truth - and this is the heart of the civil society critique of the WWC - it is a showcase for corporations who are moving in on the global water services business and for the financial and trade institutions that back them. At the 2nd WWF in The Hague, the World Water Council presented its World Water Vision endorsing a private future for water, while the big water companies aggressively promoted public-private partnerships as the solution on the global water crisis. As well, in its final declaration, the 2nd WWF refused to acknowledge that water is a human right, calling it a human "need" instead. This view that water is not a human right was repeated at the 3rd WWF in Kyoto, which also showcased a deeply controversial financial plan for water funding in the global South. Written by Michel Camdessus, former head of the International Monetary Fund, the report called for drastic changes in the funding of water delivery systems toward mega-dams and other projects at the expense of local sustainable technologies, and the use of local sustainable technologies, and the use of public funds to protect corporate water investors against political unrest and poor profit results. The Camdessus Report formed the basis for a subsequent decision to greatly increase World Bank and other regional bank funding for privatized water services in the developing world. Civil Society Opposition Concurrent with the creation of the World Water Council and the launch of the World Water Forums, a growing civil society movement started to come together to oppose the privatization of water. This network includes grassroots groups fighting for water rights around the world, but particularly in the global South; human rights and development activists; public sector workers; environmentalists; small farmers and fishers; and groups opposed to the overreaching power of the World Bank and international trade institutions, such as the World Trade Organization and the Free Trade Area of the Americas. The founding principle of this movement is that water belongs to the earth and all species and is an inalienable human right that must not be appropriated for profit. As this movement became more coordinated, it soon became clear that it had to address the authority that had been assumed by the WWC. With little time to prepare, dozens of activists attended the 2nd WWF in The Hague, where we formed a vocal opposition to the so-called "consensus" of water commodification. It was clear that we were not welcome; civil society NGOs were not even given a room in which to meet and our views could only be presented from the floor or in press conferences that we called ourselves. Nevertheless, our presence was clearly noted by participants, many of whom agreed with our opposition; the WWC authorities, who countered us at every turn; the media, who reported our views extensively; and governments, who were forces to incorporate our views into their deliberations. Over the next three years, determined to have a more organized and recognized presence in Kyoto, we forged a new network called "Water is Life." In a series of preparatory meetings between Japanese civil society activists, it was decided to participate "inside" the WWF based on three goals: to break the WWC "consensus" on a corporate-controlled future for water, to put forward our own "vision statement," and to build our movement. In Kyoto, where the secretariat was more welcoming and established a process of inclusion for civil society groups, we delivered an alternative civil society "vision statement" signed by almost 300 organizations from around the world. We brought more than 80 water activists representing grassroots groups fighting for local, public control of water from every continent. These people formed the heart of the "intervention teams" that put forward our position on water privatization in many workshops and events over the course of the week. In session after session, we swarmed the mikes and challenged the authorities on the podium with stories and statistics from the grassroots. At the CEO panel, speaker after speaker rose to challenge the blatant untruths that were being spoken by the heads of every major water company in the world. From South Africa, Argentina, Chile, The Philippines, Pakistan, Ghana, Indonesia, El Salvador, India and many other countries, our team members told about the horrors of water privatization - dirty water, exponentially rising water rates, water metres, worker lay-offs and even water wars - and, of course, of soaring corporate profits. We also took over the stage at the unveiling of the Camdessus Report, waving our "lie metres" in the air. We also co-convened, with the WWC, a major theme session on public-private partnerships and submitted at the end of an intensive two-day debate our independent report totally opposed to these partnerships. This meant that, on the most contentious issue of the whole forum, the position of civil society had to be officially placed into the record of the final transcript. Finally, at two major government consultations, our people seated themselves strategically and articulated our strong views on water as a fundamental human right. The international media - with the sad exception of the North American media - attended the 3rd WWF in large numbers and reported extensively on our activities. The success of this opposition led us to believe that we needed to create our own forum where we would put forth our own perspectives for a water-secure world and our alternatives to private service delivery. So in January 2004 we held the first Peoples' World Water Forum in Delhi, India, with grassroots groups from 65 countries in attendance. From this international gathering came a declaration highlighting our struggle against the World Bank, the World Water Council, the World Trade Organization - particularly the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATA) - and the big water companies such as Suez and Coca-Cola. We renewed our commitment to building a global network to assist local struggles for water rights, to supporting public sector delivery of water, and to conserving and reclaiming water everywhere. Finally, we agreed upon a priority to obtain a binding United Nations treaty declaring water as a human right available to all on a not-for-profit basis. Mexico City in 2006 It is now time to start preparing for the 4th World Water Forum to be held in Mexico City in March 2006. As we did in the lead-up to Kyoto, we must work with grassroots and Indigenous groups on the ground in Mexico and Latin America to determine the scope and nature of our involvement in this forum. These decisions must be rooted in the needs and culture of the local communities, who must take the leadership in determining the goals and priorities for our work there. As we did in the lead-up to the 3rd WWF, civil society groups must prepare early for this major event. The time to begin preparations is now. Much has been accomplished since Kyoto. A powerful international grassroots network has come together and asserted itself in every part of the world. In an August 28, 2004 article, The Economist magazine said the major water companies have met "hard going" in the Third World and are now pulling back. This influential journal reported that, "In many poorer countries, the political and regulatory risks are now so great that the biggest water firms are washing their hands of any involvement." From Johannesburg to Delhi, from Manila to Montevideo, these companies are encountering fierce opposition to their operations. But opposition is not limited to the developing world. In Germany and Japan, citizens are rallying around their public water supplies, and in Atlanta, Georgia, and Hamilton, Ontario, privatizations have recently been rolled back after strong local protest. The World Water Council is keenly aware of this resistance and has responded in two ways - one "soft" and one "hard." On one hand the WWC and the World Bank now admit that they made serious mistakes in the past, and are calling for more accountable and transparent public-private water partnerships with guidelines established in concert with civil society. They also realize that they have lost the battle as to whether water is a human right and are now seeking language for a UN convention that would not exclude private companies. They are also seeking partners from the NGO community to help them put a "kinder, gentler" face on their operations. At the same time, the World Bank and the regional development banks, with the backing of the WWC, have dramatically increased their funding for private water operations in the Third World and have become much more hard-line in citing privatization as a condition for new money for water services. The big water companies are no longer promising to stay in poorer countries through thick and thin; they are now saying that if the banks and the host governments will not guarantee them a secure profit, in spite of currency fluctuations and political opposition, they will leave. The WWC is working to ensure the security of their profits in the light of these new developments. The stakes are now very high. For a world running out of fresh water, the need for a democratic process over the future of this most precious resource is paramount. It can thus be argued that the 4th WWF will be the most important of these forums to date. It is vital that the global civil society movement and the local movement in Mexico work together to meet this challenge.
|
|||||||||||||||||
| All Rights Reserved. Contact: office@peaceproposal.com | ||||||||||||||||||
