Public entitled to the best water management

Henry Heyneardhi, Indonesian Forum on Globalization (INFOG), The Business Watch Indonesia, Solo, Central Java, heyneardhi@watchbusiness.org

The government's service to the public as regards drinking water management and supplies in Jakarta is very poor. Among other deficiencies, this poor service is reflected in the fact that only 600,000 people, or less than 5 percent of Jakarta's population, have access to water supplies from the city water firm, PDAM. Some 70 percent of the population meet their needs for water from low or deep wells, and the remaining 30 percent depend on river water. The poor service in Jakarta's provision of clean water to its residents is closely linked to corruption and the administration's poor performance. Therefore, as The Jakarta Post wrote on Sept. 14, corruption eradication and the enforcement of the laws and regulations constitute part of the solution to the problems related to water resources management.

This would be quite appropriate but still be inadequate, particularly in the face of the recent trends in water resources management. The proposed solution starts from an assumption that the government -- at the central and local levels -- has full control, either as a regulator or a service provider. However, considering present circumstances, such power will slowly but surely diminish and shift to another power center, the private sector.

In Indonesia, this tendency is shown by the increasing number of private companies involved in water resources management that act as providers of clean water services, including those that are also global water industry giants. There are now at least five transnational companies operating in various localities in Indonesia, namely Biwater in Batam, Suez-Lyonnaise and British Thames in Jakarta, Waterleiding Maatschappij Drenthe in Manado and Cascal BV in Pekanbaru, Riau.

In line with the worsening performance of most local water utilities (PDAMs) in Indonesia, this shift of management to private hands will clearly continue. As reported by the All- Indonesian Association of Drinking Water Companies (Perpamsi), of 292 PDAMs in Indonesia, only 29 PDAMs can be placed in the "sound" category while the remaining 263 PDAMs continue to sustain losses and build up debts so far worth a total of Rp 4 trillion. Even the central government, represented by the Directorate General of City Planning, has offered to allow the private sector to manage drinking water companies.

It is true, therefore, that the government has done a lousy job in water management and the provision of drinking water services to the community. However, the solution must not entail the delegation of water resources management to the private sector. Various studies show that water management by the private sector has a number of adverse impacts, including a widening gap in access to clean water, layoffs, and even less transparency and accountability to the public.

The private sector always has the primary motive of maximizing profits. Therefore, in the various cases of water privatization that have occurred, there has been a tendency to hike the price of water. Further, for the private sector, the community is considered as being made up of consumers who need water, and not as citizens entitled to have access to clean water.

If water is managed by the private sector, members of the community will only gain access as long as they can afford it -- to the disadvantage of the poor.

To maximize profits, reductions in manpower, or layoffs, are common. This was the case in Manila, where the privatization of water management caused a significant reduction in manpower. The same tendency is likely in the case of water privatization in Jakarta; lately the employees of the city's water firm, PAM Jaya, have been forced to choose whether to resign voluntarily or become employees of Lyonnaise or Thames Jaya.

In the private sector, the management is only responsible to the company's shareholders, leading to loss of control by the public. The local community will thus be unable to influence policies related to price increases, water quality and the construction of new pipeline networks or connections, unlike in a case where water management and provision is in the hands of public agencies like the PDAMs.

What can be done to ensure a sustainable water management pattern? The public should indeed demand that the government seriously play its role as a regulator and provider of clean water for the community, as the Post suggested. The public must also be involved more frequently in water resources management, for instance through a water management council at the local level.

The local community, as written by Maude Barlow in his book Gold: The Fight to Stop the Corporate Theft of the World's Water, which was published this year, is the best guardian and manager of water because practices that endanger water resources will be most easily detectable at the local level. Therefore, it is very important to make the local community the guardian of water resources and to ensure that in this respect its position is parallel to that of the government. The local community must set up a water management council, the members of which represent various local interests.

This council should act as a partner for the local government in controlling water management, monitoring water pollution and promoting wise management practices. A water resource management council may urge the local community to develop awareness about, for example, the significance of water resources conservation and reclamation. In its relations with the local administration, this council should represent the local community by being involved in every process concerning the formulation and adoption of policies on water management.

Most importantly, the council must always promote the rights of all community members to have access to clean water.

The presence of such a council would democratize the management of water resources. It would be able to guarantee that the management of resources vital to human life is always under public control and supervision. In this way, there will never be a situation in which a decision on water management will be left to only a handful of people, especially those who are only profit-oriented.