Moncton, BC, in Canada has a new water treatment plant built and operated by USF Canada-Hardman Group (Greater Moncton Water Ltd.) This plant and other public-private partnerships are the subject of growing controversy between pro-privatization groups and anti-privatization groups.
Click here to enlarge imageAgainst the tide of privatization in the utility industry, a countercurrent is urging utility customers to help stop privatization of water and wastewater utilities in Canada.
The Water Watch Campaign, organized by the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), contends that water is a right rather than a commodity, and would best be protected by a public agency.
"We believe that the privatization of water and wastewater undermines the quality of service and accountability to the public," remarked Ron Crawley, a senior research officer for CUPE.
CUPE believes that resistance to public-private partnerships will intensify in both Canada and the US as people come to realize what is at stake, Crawley said.
At the same time, various types of privatization from outright purchase of the utility's assets to contracting services are growing in popularity in the U.S. and Canada.
To the Water and Wastewater Equipment Manufacturers' Association, privatization is a decision that should be weighed at the individual community level.
"To believe that just because a utility is publicly owned, monies will automatically flow back into its operations is naive at best," said Dawn Kristof, president of WWEMA.
"Rechanneling of water and wastewater revenues into a community's general operating fund for other purposes has been one of the contributing factors to the $2 trillion in needs facing our nation's water infrastructure," she observed, adding that there is a critical role for both public and private investment in water-related projects.
Scott Edwards, director of marketing for USFilter Operating Services, says that private companies can be very accountable because of how community satisfaction affects a private water company's bottom line.
"Our interest is in long-term relationships," Edwards said. "We want to be in this business as long as there is water that needs to be treated."
CUPE's position is that designing and building can easily be done by a private company, but that owning and operating the utility is something that should remain in public hands. "It has to be owned by the public and for the public," said Catherine Louli, a communications specialist for CUPE. "Any money made has to go back into water."
The Water Watch campaign, according to Crawley, intends to educate CUPE's members and the public about the dangers of water privatization. It is also designed to pressure governments at all levels to take responsibility for the direct provision of water/wastewater services and the necessary infrastructure funding to support those services.
Their strategy is to build committees in communities that will monitor and respond to any attempts at privatization. The committees research the parties involved in the proposed contract and send up red flags if there seem to be any problems.
The campaign is spreading its message with its web site, http://www.cupe.ca/waterwatch.html.
A complete report on the debate for and against privatization is available in the June 2000 issue of WaterWorld Magazine.
