Green NGOs oppose bill legalizing water privatization

Green NGOs oppose bill legalizing water privatization

Bambang Nurbianto and Adianto P. Simamora, The Jakarta Post,
Jakarta

Fearing grim consequences for the environment, environmental
organizations have expressed strong opposition to the water
resources bill that will become a legal basis for water
privatization.

Those opposing the bill include the Kehati Biodiversity
Foundation and the Indonesian Forum for the Environment (Walhi).

Kehati executive director Ismid Hadad told The Jakarta Post
over the weekend that the bill would bring more hardship to the
people, including farmers.

If the bill is passed into law as it is, it will endorse
privatization without much public control, and this would lead to
excessive water exploitation by private entities, higher water
rates and also limit the urban poor's access to water.

In the long run, uncontrolled exploitation of water resources
by private entities could create water scarcity in urban
areas.

"We oppose the bill because it would bring serious
consequences, both for the environment and for poor people,"
Ismid said.

According to Ismid, privatization of water resources would
particularly affect the urban poor.

First, those living in slums would not be the main target of
network expansion by any private water company, thus further
marginalizing the poor.

Second, if the poor could get access to tap water, they would
likely spend much of their income on water as a private water
company would seek higher rates and would not subsidize its
customers.

"Therefore, we should oppose the bill," Ismid said.

The bill, drafted the Ministry of Resettlement and Regional
Infrastructure, has already been submitted to the House of
Representatives. The House's steering committee has tasked
Commission IV on infrastructure to debate the water resources
bill.

A bill whose deliberation is assigned to a House commission is
considered less important and of lower priority than other bills.
An important bill is normally discussed by a special committee.

Walhi executive director Longgena Ginting said Walhi opposed
the water resources bill due to its endorsement of privatization,
which would allow uncontrolled exploitation of water resources
and thus lead to environmental destruction.

Ginting said that Indonesia should learn from the experiences
of other developing countries that had planned to privatize water
management, such as Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador and Panama.

In those countries, Ginting said, the people opposed water
management privatization as it meant they would have to pay
higher rates to private operators.

Indonesia has in fact privatized the water sector to some
extent, especially in Jakarta.

French company Suez Lyonnaise des Eaux and British company
Thames Water Overseas Ltd have shares in Jakarta administration-
owned water company PAM Jaya. The companies established joint
venture companies PT Pam Lyonnaise Jaya (Palyja) and PT Thames
PAM Jaya (TPJ).

Despite the entrance of two foreign companies, people in
Jakarta still complain about the quality of the water they
produce as well as distruption to water supply.

The two companies have also failed to expand their networks,
arguing that the city administration had increased water rates
only a fraction of the amount they had requested.

Ginting suspected the plan to further privatize water
resources in Indonesia was a result of strong lobbying from
multinational water companies through multilateral organizations.

"They are very strong and they always seek ways to expand
their market into developing countries. We better watch out," he
said.

Meanwhile, legislator Erwin Pardede from Commission IV
acknowledged that the bill allowed private participation in water
resources management, but he refused to call it privatization.

Pardede then questioned the reasons for the environmentalists
to reject the participation of the private sector in water
management when the government would have ultimate control over
water resources.

"We need a comprehensive law on how to manage and preserve our
water resources. Therefore, we agree to deliberate the bill,"
Pardede said.

Ismid and Ginting, however, questioned why the government and
the House had not disseminated information about the crucial
bill.

They contended that the bill would affect both urban people as
well farmers in remote areas as the bill opened the possibility
for the government to collect fees from farmer groups that
utilize water supplies.

They said a law on water resources would be acceptable if
Indonesia already had a comprehensive law on natural resources
management that could be an umbrella law for all specific laws on
natural resources, such as the water resources bill.

"I think the deliberation of the water resources bill should
wait until the natural resources bill, prepared by the Office of
the State Minister of the Environment, is passed into law.
Therefore, they would not overlap," he added.