Colloquium Day 1: September 25: Key issues from the presentations
The entire day was dedicated to country-wise presentations. These were summed up beautifully at the end, after which we split up briefly into buzz groups, to come together again for a cultural performance. This nicely set the stage for the 26th’s morning session of working groups, with a palpable urgency likely to give us fertile ground for sharing in today’s afternoon plenary. The key issues to arise from the day have been summed up below.
There is a deliberate and conscious effort to change the terms of discourse terminologies. Language has been creatively used to disempower; for instance, changing ‘control’ to ‘management’.
But water is political: unless we get back to the politics of water, we won’t be able to push the strategies that we want to see adopted.
There is a deliberate and conscious attempt on the part of the state to withdraw from what is its responsibility. Ever increasingly, the market becomes the final arbiter of all values.
There is an urgent need to define our political strategy.
We have all allowed a rapid de-politicization of all citizens. The state, and people, must be understood as political entities
There is lack of clarity on our part on the role of NGOs as subcontractors of the state and IFIs – this is an arena we should make clearer.
Privatization is as unaccountable, at least, as the way public management has played out – it is a move from one unaccountable to another unaccountable system.
The Polluter Pays Principle and other such measures must be pushed and their active adoption ensured. We need to draw out our political inspirations.
This is an act of politics in which we are faced with difficult situations, but the question of who has power is the one to ask. If we fail to play our part in addressing these fundamental issues, we can choose to be a merely incidental part of a historic process.
But thus far, people have resisted and continue to resist. This indicates that some power, at least, does lie with the people, and therein rests our responsibility and source of strength.
Though big press companies are owned by corporations, the press itself is not an automatic enemy. In fact, it likes to carry things, and we can harness its power intelligently. We have content to offer – it’s a question of packaging it right.
Right to water for all living things, which we see as essential and organic, is not the dominant discourse. Thus far, the discussion on water has centered on the needs of people, i.e. humans in the context of ecosystems.
The press in this case will not refuse to carry the counter-discourse; we must strategize using this to our fullest advantage.
It is essential to keep a steady focus on policy. We must ensure sustained reach to policy-makers and engage with them – we need to use the power of knowledge when we talk to keep the discourse alive, for this power rests with what we have to say.
There is growing concerns on the impacts of human activities on water resources – this has now come full circle: we have extracted so much water and given it back in an altered form which cannot be used, that we lack access to potable water. Nature is getting back at us. This is part of the privatization process.
Though this process is such an ideological one, there has been little study on it. Integrated water management seems to be a global concern but its effect on peoples’ lives has not been sufficiently looked into – we are, after all, dealing with a phenomenon that goes on from the time that water falls from the sky to the time user charges are applied on people.
We need to show that privatization is happening most of the time during the movement of water from the glaciers to the sea. It seems incredulous that there are restrictions on rain water harvesting – a clear case of water being used as a mechanism for exclusion.
There is a need to look at the water cycle and rethink our interventions.
We not only need to show that privatization is a failure but also discredit the unfounded claim that the public sector is doomed to fail. Explaining the successes in Latin America in more detail would help in this regard. A manifestation of this is in the form of counter-privatization movements.
Citizenship, entitlements – these are big political ideas and we might be hesitant to raise it in public discourse. The reaction to big ideas is well known, but what is not familiar to ordinary people is where these terms come from. We need to flesh out those links and show them how these are truly powerful aspirations.
We should have more confidence in ordinary people. We are faced with difficult situations, and a new enclosure movement—this is part of a historic process, but one which people have resisted in the past.
What can ordinary people do? Are they to use grey water, and if so, then how? Get people to talk with policy makers. Think of anything beyond privatization. We need ways to transform processes. What are the alternative solutions?