Country report on water legitimizes privatization

Moch. N. Kurniawan, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The Indonesia country report prepared for the World Water Forum only justifies the government's plan to privatize water management but fails to clarify the implications of privatization, analysts and activists say.

Yanuar Nugroho of Business Watch Indonesia said on Friday that despite all the problems associated with water, the report only endorsed the World Bank's Water Resources Sector Adjustment Loan (Watsal) scheme, in which water is treated as a commodity.

"The new concept in managing water will treat water as a commodity. So, those who can pay for water will get water ... the government fails to explain this to the public," he told The Jakarta Post.

The country's water report disclosed 80 percent of Indonesia's population does not have access to piped water, and an annual investment of Rp 5.1 trillion (US$570) is needed to increase the population's access to piped water to 40 percent by 2015.

It also said that the government had limited scope for investment in developing water infrastructure, and, therefore, it said adjustment of laws and regulations were required to ensure the sustainability of water resource infrastructure.

Pattimura, from the International NGOs Forum on Indonesian Development (INFID), said the report described the misery of many Indonesians but this was used as a pretext for inviting private firms to manage the country's water resources under the privatization plan.

Pattimura demanded that the government and House of Representatives not push ahead with privatization, but rather consult with people across the country about the water resources bull to reach the best concept for managing water.

According to Pattimura and Yanuar, the water resources bill basically invites private firms to take part in managing water, not only its distribution but also the control of water resources.

"If water management from upstream to downstream is given to private firms, what is the position of the general public?" asked Yanuar.

"But sadly, the government has been concealing the privatization process under the name of water policy reform."

He warned that in many countries, privatization had failed to expand water distribution.

Private firms would be responsible only to their shareholders, and not to the public, and therefore, the public would be left out in the cold when anything went wrong with the company's policy, he said.

Yanuar cited the failure of the privatization project in Jakarta to provide better water for customers. Despite this, the provincial government was to raise water charges next month for the third time in five years.

Besides, private firms managing water had to be financed by the World Bank and other international financial institutions, meaning that they had not enough money to invest in water development, he said.

However, the government's plan to legalize the privatization of water through the water resource bill has drawn protests from various parties, including non-governmental organizations, farmers' and consumers' associations.

The farmers' associations, for example, have complained that the bill would oblige farmers to pay for irrigation water, something that would definitely increase their production costs.

Environmentalists also said the bill failed to require environmental impact analyses (Amdal) and social impact analyses regarding water resources management.

The bill also stipulates that water conservation charges are obligatory, but fails to say whether some of the money will be used to improve environmental conditions.

The government has repeatedly denied the accusations, but it would seem to be failing to give satisfactory explanation to its opponents.