The Dominion - privatization

World Bank Darling Promotes Privatization of Reserves

Moira Peters — Wed, 03 Nov 2010 05:32:29 +0000

Critics say fee-simple title on reserves could further erode Indigenous land base

VANCOUVER—Peruvian economist and World Bank poster child Hernando de Soto visited Vancouver earlier this month to speak in favour of the establishment of individual property ownership (“fee simple”) on First Nations reserves in Canada.

The First Nations Property Ownership (FNPO) conference—hosted by the First Nations Tax Commission—paired de Soto with a select roster of Indigenous leaders, lawyers, economists and scholars from across British Columbia and Canada to promote a proposal that would allow fee simple title on reserves.

Instead of collective title to reserve land held by bands, the proposal aims to give individuals living on reserve access to the same legal private property rights that exists in the rest of the country. Currently, collective title is bound by section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867 (a guiding provision of the Indian Act), which allocates legislative jurisdiction to the federal government over “Indians and lands reserved for the Indians,” constitutionally protecting existing Indigenous title.

“What [the proposal is] doing is putting a damper on 91(24) lands,” said Harley Chingee of the First Nations Lands Advisory Board. “There’s no internal controls once you take 91(24) out of it. Because then the provinces—and Canada, for that matter—can have control.”

The proposal is championed by conference organizer C.T. (Manny) Jules, Chief Commissioner of the First Nation Tax Commission, former Chief of the Kamloops Indian Band and one of Canada’s foremost proponents of private property ownership on reserves.

The conference came at the crest of an increasingly aggressive effort throughout recent months to generate support for the controversial proposal—a charge led by Jules alongside conservative political scientist Tom Flanagan. Flanagan—a former campaign manager for Stephen Harper—has published a number of contentious books and articles prescribing solutions to First Nations economic development and land management. He most recently co-authored Beyond the Indian Act, which argues for federal legislation that would make way for fee simple on reserves.

In response to this effort, a growing group of Indigenous people and chiefs have been speaking out against the Jules/Flanagan proposal, arguing that fee simple property ownership will leave collective Indigenous title and rights and reserve lands—which are affirmed in section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982—vulnerable to encroachment by developers, corporate interests, and federal and provincial control. Chingee has been open in his rejection of the fee simple proposal, as has Arthur Manuel, spokesperson for the Indigenous Network on Economies and Trade.

De Soto, president of the Institute for Liberty and Democracy (ILD), is notorious for advocating fee simple property ownership and market-led agrarian reform among Latin America’s campesinos. His ideas are promoted by international financial institutions like the World Bank, as well as the US international development organization USAID, which uses his theory to back their own market-driven development projects throughout Latin America.

He’s also been assailed with criticism from popular and grassroots organizations such as Via Campesina—a global peasant movement—which maintains that the ramifications of de Soto’s economic agenda are the global phenomena of dispossession of Indigenous people and intensified economic stratification.

Like de Soto’s proposal for Latin America, which aims to convert latent or “dead” assets into market capital, Jules and Flanagan aim to transform collective rights into individual titles, which can be openly traded on the market. In Canada, collective land title is understood to be the inherent right of Indigenous peoples.

In a letter against the fee simple proposal published in the First Nations Strategic Bulletin, Manuel asserts the power and protection of collective title. “No single individual can give up or extinguish our Aboriginal title and Indigenous rights. It would be suicide or extinguishment for our future generations to accept fee simple in exchange for our collective title,” he wrote.

Chingee’s response to the proposal warns of the damaging impact of privatizing reserve land. “The change would undermine signed treaties across Canada, undermine our political autonomy, restrict our creativity and innovation and place us in a dangerous position where any short-term financial difficulty may result in the wholesale liquidation of our reserve lands, or the creation of a patchwork quilt of reserve lands, like Oka,” he wrote.

The fee simple proposal has come under further fire for implying that individual property ownership is the sole recourse for economic prosperity on reserves. De Soto’s frequent reference to reserve lands as “dead capital” was wholeheartedly adopted by the conference organizers, who littered promotional material with the promise to unleash this untapped asset.

A recent article by Dan Cayo in The Vancouver Sun explains that a common approach taken by individuals on reserve is to find substitutes for individual property ownership, such as long-term leasing and “certificates of possession,” which are enough to provide sufficient collateral to qualify for business loans.

“Certainly you don’t need fee simple standards to prosper. People have an illusion that’s totally false,” says Chingee, citing examples of First Nations that have achieved economic success without fee simple ownership. “You just have to look at Westbank First Nation out in Kelowna. And there’s countless others, like Squamish Nation in Vancouver, for example, Macleod Lake Indian Band, up north of Prince George, that are prosperous 91(24) lands."

Ironically, the fee simple advocates tried to use Westbank’s economic success to their advantage, adding former Chief Ron Derrickson’s name to the conference’s list of speakers and promotional material without his consent or support.

Derrickson—known as one of the most successful Indigenous developers in the country—was alerted by Manuel to this name-borrowing. Once alerted, Derrickson voiced his disproval of the fee simple proposal and his name was removed from the list.

The FNPO website uses the Switsemalph 7 reserve near Salmon Arm as an example of a community with untapped development potential.

“Actually if you cut out the environmentally sensitive areas you come up with a picture that has a lot of development,” says Dave Nordquist from Adams Lake, refuting the FNPO’s claims about Switsemalph 7. The environmentally sensitive area is part of the Salmon River Delta, an area unsuitable for any land development.

Though Tom Flanagan is not a listed speaker at the conference, and is rarely named on the FNPO website, his presence is discernable. The cover image from Beyond the Indian Act graces the front page of the site, and his co-author, Andre Le Dressay, was a speaker during the Vancouver conference.

Beyond the Indian Act bears the subtitle “Restoring Aboriginal Property Rights,” implying that fee simple property ownership is a traditional right among Indigenous people in Canada. This message is reiterated in the forward and in a recent Globe and Mail editorial—both written by Jules, who evokes early Indigenous civilizations across the Americas to make the case that individual property rights and free market trade are fundamental to Indigenous peoples, and have been obscured and impeded upon by colonial legislation.

Nevertheless, the fee simple proposal also names the Torrens title system as a source of inspiration—a colonial model which hinges on the creation of an individual title registry. Its name pays tribute to Sir Robert Torrens, a colonial premier who introduced the title system to South Australia in the mid-19th century.

Though proponents claim that the right to fee simple title is inherent, the proposal is curiously lacking in popular Indigenous endorsement. Whether or not de Soto will be able to drum up support for the proposal remains to be seen.

Emma Feltes is a writer, researcher and activist based in Halifax and south interior British Columbia. Her work centers on First Nations-State relations, cultural heritage and intellectual property, and urban issues. Neskie Manuel is Secwepemc from the interior of British Columbia. He likes cycling and speaking Secwepemctsin. This article was originally published by the Vancouver Media Co-op.

de Soto

Post-Colonial?

Fri, 06 Oct 2006 16:36:55 +0000

Canada Post and the privatization of Guatemala

Canada Post is accused of union-busting in Guatemala. photo: Dulcie Meatheringham

Originally published in Briarpatch Magazine

In 1997, the World Bank loaned 13 million dollars (US) to the government of Guatemala to finance privatization of the country's seaport, electrical grid, and telephone and postal services. A Canada Post subsidiary and its offshore partner, International Postal Services (IPS), received the lucrative concession to manage the privatization of the Guatemalan postal service.

Canada Post International Limited (CPIL), which at the time was known as Canada Post Systems Management Limited, is a subsidiary company of Canada Post, a crown corporation wholly owned by the government of Canada.

The World Bank had predicted that the three labour unions representing Guatemalan postal workers would resist the privatization project and the plan to 'shed excess labour.' But rather than negotiate a contract with the unions, CPIL is alleged by former postal workers and postal union leaders to have deliberately eliminated all three unions using illegal tactics.

Former workers and union officials allege that by using bribery, company unions, intimidation, physical assaults, death threats, and various other illegal tactics, CPIL-IPS not only eliminated the unions, but alsoengineered a complete turnover of staff within 18 months.

Guatemalan labour federation leader José Pinzón observes that even the worst labour abuses during the dictatorships (which followed the CIA coup against the labour-friendly democratic government in 1954 and lasted through the 1980s) were no worse than the union-busting tactics employed by CPIL-IPS and the other transnational agents of privatization.

The final step of CPIL's union-busting was to terminate every worker, after which the public postal service was restructured as a private company and renamed Correos. Some former workers, who did not have a history of union activism and who signed a contract promising not to join or organize a union, were rehired by Correos. However, to further ensure no union infiltration of the workplace, these workers were again terminated after they provided sufficient training to their own replacements.

Guatemalan labour federation officials state that wage increases and other perks promised to the new Correos workers never materialized and that the company defaulted on its payments to the national social security fund, which left these unorganized workers without healthcare and other benefits.

The World Bank's privatization scheme had a profoundly devastating effect on Guatemalan society. The United Nations reports the proportion of the Guatemalan population engaged in economic activity fell six per cent during the period of privatization, from 27.6 per cent in 1995, to 21.6 per cent in 1999. At the same time, union representation in Guatemala fell from five per cent of the workforce to 2.5 per cent.

Approximately 65 per cent of the terminated postal workers were women. In Guatemala's highly gender-divided society, these women had a particularly difficult time finding new work. The most accessible 'women's' jobs are domestic servants, maquila workers, home-industry workers, or street vendors. Former postal workers could not hope to find wages and work conditions comparable to their old jobs and many never found employment.

Many former workers had to remove their children from school so they could work to supplement the family income. According to a UN report, Guatemalan children spend, on average, only 1.3 years in school. The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions reports that 821,875 Guatemalan children between seven and 14 years of age were active in the informal economy in 2001, and the International Labour Organization reports that in 2002, 937,530 children worked as domestics in 'conditions of modern slavery.' According to the US State Department, child domestics work 13 to 16 hours a day for an average monthly salary of $51 (US). Many of these child workers suffer psychological mistreatment, violence and sexual abuse.

The unions of Guatemala, as part of a broad coalition of social justice organizations, played a key role in bringing about the peace negotiations that ended Guatemala's 36-year civil war in 1996. Ironically though, the end of the war also made Guatemala an attractive target for transnational companies intent on union-busting and siphoning off national wealth. The negotiated peace accords outlined basic human rights with specific provisions for women, indigenous people and workers. However, a failure to ratify the peace accords after their signing in 1996--largely due to organized right-wing resistance--led to unfulfilled promises for social progress. This also gave corporations the ability to violate the intent of the peace accords without technically violating laws not yet in place.

Regardless of the failure to implement the peace accords to establish expanded workers' rights, Guatemala is a signatory to the major international labour agreements and has a national labour code comparable to most states, including Canada. It is not lax laws or some peculiar cultural traits of Latin Americans that allow abuse by transnational corporations such as CPIL; it is the complicity between states and corporations that allow such abuse to occur.

Proponents of privatization claim that overall service and security has improved since the privatization of the Guatemalan postal service. Former postal workers recognize that the service was in need of improvement, but they add it was government security officers who were most responsible for delaying, opening and stealing mail during the war years.

With all of Correos' profits, as well as guaranteed consultancy fees, flowing to an unidentifiable group of investors in IPS, a company registered in the Bahamas, it may not be clear who specifically is benefiting from the privatization of Guatamala's postal service, but we know who isn't --the people of Guatemala and Canada.

In 2004, the Guatemalan government renewed the initial concession awarded in 1997 to Canada Post International Ltd. and its faceless offshore partner International Postal Services for another 10 years. Since 1990, Canada Post's international wing has undertaken 180 projects, including a similar privatization scheme in Lebanon.

Michael Skinner is a labour activist, musician and educator. Since 2000, he has been on education leave from his job as a letter carrier with Canada Post to pursue studies as a specialist in Peace and Conflict Studies at the Trudeau Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Toronto, and as a PhD candidate in the Department of Political Science at York University.

This article is based on original research in Guatemala and interviews conducted with former Guatemalan postal workers, union leaders, labour federation leaders, social activists, Guatemalan government officials and United Nations officials. Canada Post officials have thus far declined to comment.

Michael Skinner discovers that the impact of privatization in Guatemala has Canada Post's stamp of approval.

Potable Politics

Sat, 25 Mar 2006 22:30:55 +0000

Will water put the <em>Zapatismo</em> into Mexico's big city politics?

Mexicans protest against the privatization of water and the 4th World Water Forum photo: IndyMedia Mexico

The 4th World Water Forum has drawn to a close in Mexico City, but the debate over who will provide clean drinking water in regions throughout the country has only just begun. In Guadalajara, Mexico's second most populous city, drinking water is a private business. The local water company was sold to multi-national corporations in 1998, since then the price of water has doubled, causing public uproar.

The Jalisco state government and the federal government devised a plan--called Arcediano--to build an elaborate water diversion scheme costing nearly $US 1 billion.

Mexican President Vincente Fox is expected to visit Guadalajara in April to finalize the deal that will divert water from Rio Santiago. However, Jalisco's state water authority and non-governmental organizations have warned that Arcediano is doomed to fail; their studies show the river is highly contaminated with heavy metals. The project is also expected to flood a large section of forestland that is already threatened by poorly planned urban sprawl.

¨We're in a difficult position here,¨ says a Guadalajara taxi driver. ¨Nobody wants to privatize water but nobody trusts the government to manage the water.¨ Scientists say there are other, cleaner, and more affordable ways to bring potable water to the city, leading citizens to demand an alternative plan.

Guadalajana is not alone in its struggle for clean water. With a population of over 100 million, Mexico has fewer than five million citizens who live in cities with a high availability of water. According to Mexico's Secretary of Social Development (SEDESOL), 26 million Mexicans live in cities where water availability is "extremely low."

A column in Guadalajara's Público newspaper argues that Mexico needs a broader approach to its commitment to clean water, tying in the scientific and technological components, with the legislative and the educational components. Despite the hype of the forum and the vocal concern of citizens in Mexico's cities, however, political candidates at the local, state and federal level have been largely silent on the issue.

La otra campaña could offer a response to the politicians' silence and give citizens a voice. Over the past four months, la otra campaña ("the other campaign") led by Subcomandante Marcos (also known as Delegado Zero) has been travelling across Mexico. The aim of the campaign, leading up to the July 2nd presidential election, is to gain a better understanding of citizens' concerns in different parts of the country.

Denouncing all political candidates in favour of direct action to protect local self-dermination, Marcos has tapped into widespread political cynicism and is building support for reducing the plight of Mexico's indigenous people.

According to University of Guadalajara sociology professor Dr. Jorge Regalado, citizens across the country are looking for the kind of resistance the Zapatistas have developed in their home state of Chiapas.

¨The people from the government ignore us. We are interested in water, not money, because we can't drink money,¨ says a campesino woman in Querétaro in central Mexico.

When la otra campaña visited Querétaro in central Mexico, Marcos proposed that followers form brigades to stop the drilling of 14 industrial wells in El Batán, which threaten to disrupt the area's most important aquifier.

Such calls to action are not uncommon in rural areas where the Zapatistas have advanced local self-determination in autonomous communities they call Caracoles. However, residents of Guadalajara have difficulty seeing the relevance of a peasant-based movement in a cosmopolitan city of eight million people.

Perhaps the biggest question facing la otra campaña is how to inspire Mexican solidarity along the principles of an open social movement. According to Regalado, one of the major drawbacks to the Zapatista movement is the fact that the Sixth Declaration of the Lacondon, the Zapatistas' constitution from below and to the left, excludes a significant portion of Mexican society.

¨People are tired of political corruption and feel the economy is not fair to the average person, but the Zapatistas´ are limiting their message to an indigenous struggle and excluding the rest of us,¨ says a student in Guanajuato.

Dr. Jorge Regalado says one of Marcos' central objectives should be creating the "urban Zapatista."

The potential is here, says Regalado. He notes that despite its traditionally conservative voting record, the citizens of Guadalajara have demonstrated the power and potential of citizen-based movements before. After organizing a massive movement of "the indebted" following the peso crisis in the mid 1990s, Regalado says Guadalajara and the state of Jalisco have the ability to pull together a diverse crowd around common goals.

There are strong indications that adherents to la otra campaña may achieve some of the results they seek by showing the applicability of the Zapatistas' "other way" to Mexico's big city problems. With water accessibility becoming a major concern throughout the country, it has the potential to become the focal point of a broader social movement, linking rural and urban
communities around the progressive changes Mexicans demand.

Van Ferrier wonders if water will be the issue that puts the Zapatismo into Mexico's big city politics.

Beautiful -- Privatized -- British Columbia?

Mon, 14 Nov 2005 21:42:35 +0000

Health care workers, teachers, fight government over policy

When British Columbia's teachers defied laws passed by Gordon Campbell's Liberals to stage an "illegal strike" in October, it was the second major showdown with organized labour since the Liberals took power in 2001. The health care workers' strike in April 2004 had seen 43,000 workers in 11 unions join picket lines.

Teachers, union members and other supporters march on the provincial legislature in Victoria. Photo: Janine Bandcroft/BC Indymedia

The Liberal government imposed contracts on health care workers and teachers, bypassing collective bargaining and arbitration by legislating their terms directly. "The government tore up the collective agreement in both cases," said Larry Kuehn of the BC Teachers' Federation (BCTF).

Before the 2001 election, Campbell had told the Health Employees Union's (HEU) newspaper, the Guardian, that "I don't believe in ripping up agreements....I have never said I would tear up agreements....I am not tearing up any agreements." Once in power, however, the Liberals imposed pay cuts and replaced over 6,000 public sector workers with corporate contract positions.

While the Campbell government did not cut teachers' positions directly, it did not provide the funding to back up legislation of a 2.5 per cent per year salary increase and other increased costs. School boards were forced to cut teaching staff by 2,600, or eight per cent, and 100 schools were closed. Anger over increased class sizes, lack of separate classes for special needs students and the attack on bargaining rights fueled the decision of 42,000 teachers to go on strike.

The question remains, however: why would Campbell's Liberals actively pick fights with some of the province's largest trade unions?

The initial answer tends to be either that the government has a deep disdain for BC's powerful unions, or that BC politics have always been characterized by showdowns between labour and business-backed right wing governments--depending on who is asked.

"The government doesn't like some of the big public sector unions," said Marc Lee, Senior Economist at the BC office of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA). "To injure those unions, they're willing to engage in some fairly bad public policy."

Under the dislike, however, is an agenda. According to some observers, the real motivation is tax cuts and privatization, to which the unions are a significant barrier.

Lee explained that tax cuts provided the justification for deep cuts to public services. When the Liberals first came to power in 2001, they legislated $2.3 billion in tax cuts from an overall budget of around $26 billion. The result, says Lee, was "the biggest deficit in provincial history." Public services budgets were cut by one third, while funding for education was merely frozen.

Trade union march on October 17. Photo: Janine Bandcroft/BC Indymedia

According to Lee, "the deficit that came from the tax cuts was used as a justification" for cuts, which in turn are driving privatization. In the case of health care workers, privatization was a key element in the government's agenda. 6,000 public sector jobs were replaced with corporate contracts.

In the case of education, however, privatization is more subtle.

The BCTF's Larry Kuehn says the Liberals are taking "inch by inch measures" to privatize parts of the education system.

"They are making things more difficult for the public schools," said Kuehn. "It encourages private schools."

"If the public system is starved of funding then people will tend to gravitate towards private alternatives," said Lee. "It is not privatization per se, but does boost the private system."

Kuehn points out that private schools--including, he notes, religious, elite and fundamentalist institutions--receive 50 per cent of the funding per student that public schools get. "They just expanded provisions for special needs students to 100 per cent of what public schools get," said Kuehn. This has been seen by some--especially public school teachers--as a first step to increasing overall funding for private schools.

Dr. Ernie Lightman, a professor in Social Work at the University of Toronto and former faculty member of the London School of Economics, called the tactics used in BC "very analogous to what Margaret Thatcher did in Britain."

"If you're going to do something the other guy doesn't want done, you beat up on his symbol," said Lightman. In Thatcher's case, "Privatization was a way of wrecking the unions."

Lightman, who has studied the tenure of Mike Harris' Conservative government in Ontario, said that privatization in BC is driven by a long history of polarized power struggles between "big labour and big business".

Harris' cuts, he said, were more ideological, and didn't require a showdown with unions. "They said 'we're cutting taxes and we're going to reduce the deficit'." "They shut down womens' shelters because they didn't want to 'break up families,'" said Lightman.

Lightman explains that the relative power of unions in BC is due to the history of natural resource extraction, which is "absolutely essential" to the province's economy. Workers in mining and timber were more vulnerable.

"If you're in an isolated mining town in BC, your work is your life, there's no distinction." "You need a union more than you do in Toronto," where the automobile industry plays a significant role. According to Lightman, the culture of strong, organized labour that developed in the natural resource sector has carried over to the public sector trade unions in BC.

Stephen Howard of the BC Government Employees' Union was optimistic about the future of the ongoing battles over public policy in BC. A "rigid agenda for privatization regardless of the cost -- to taxpayers, in decline of quality of service," said Howard, is leading to "mounting anger", evidence of which can be seen in the public support for the striking teachers.

The high profile strikes, he said, have "helped galvanize public opinion against privatization." The BCTF strike was "a huge victory for the labour movement."

"Audiences outside of BC don't realize the extent that the government has thumbed its nose at workers' rights," said Howard, citing "nine separate occasions" where the government was convicted of "violating basic and fundamental rights of working people" by the International Labour Organization in the last three years. BC, he added, has the "worst record of any provincial government" when it comes to labour.

According to Lee, privatization is losing credibility. "The cost savings aren't materializing the way they planned," he said, citing an "increase in absenteeism" and a "decrease in productivity" in the health care jobs targeted by the government in 2004.

Lightman thinks that the unions are waiting out the government, which is significantly weaker than it was after winning a vast majority of provincial seats in 2001. "They'll make a symbolic stand, and wait and hope for an NDP government."

Why does BC's Liberal government keep picking major fights with trade unions? Dru Oja Jay asks around.

Water Privatization Plan Goes Awry in Tanzania

Thu, 26 May 2005 22:33:33 +0000

A water privatization plan in Tanzania backed by the IMF, World Bank, and the British government and run by a British-German-Tanzanian conglomerate named City Water Services has been canceled by the Tanzanian government just two years into the project's ten year contract.

A Tanzanian government official cited in Forbes magazine claims that the privatization plan, which was to provide better water service to the country's capital Dar es Salaam, has in fact led to the deterioration of the city's water supply. The official blames City Water Services for investing only half the amount needed to replace worn out parts in the city's water supply system and to expand the water supply network.

Peter Hardstaff, head of policy for the World Development Movement, blames not only the company but also questions the development policies of the world's financial institutions and western governments, which are the key proponents of water privatization in the developing world.

"This is yet another example of water privatization failing to deliver clean water to poor communities. Rich country governments and the IMF and World Bank must abandon their support for this disastrous policy. It is a scandal that the UK aid budget, money that should go to reduce poverty, was used to push water privatization in Tanzania," explained Hardstaff to Accra's Public Agenda newspaper.

The Guardian reports that the collapse of this project will throw into question many other water privatization projects around the world. The newspaper notes that demonstrations and increased "resentment against private water monopolies" are already occurring in South America, Africa, the Caribbean and Asia as more and more western companies are accused of raising prices beyond what most in the developing world can afford.

allAfrica.com: UK Water Company Kicked Out of Privatisation Contract

Forbes: Tanzania Scraps Deal With Water Company

Business Week: Tanzania scraps deal with water company

The Guardian: Flagship water privatisation fails in Tanzania

From the Tap to the Bottle and Back Again

Sat, 23 Apr 2005 23:13:41 +0000

A look at bottled water and privatization

Most distributors of bottled water in Canada do not pay for the water they extract from aquifers and publicly-funded water systems. photo: Dru Oja Jay

Many of us have purchased a bottle of water thinking that we were paying for a pure product taken from an abundant source and packaged in a clean container. Maybe not, according to Tony Clarke, director of the Polaris Institute and author of Inside the Bottle: An Exposé of the Bottled Water Industry. Clarke says we may not only be supporting dubious social and environmental practices, but also contributing to the privatization of our public water systems.

In February 2005, the Polaris Institute brought together more than twenty "water warriors" on the banks of Lake Michigan to discuss regional issues and cross-border strategies concerning the bottled water industry. In a talk he delivered at that meeting, Clarke outlined what he sees as some of the key problems with privatized water management and distribution in Canada.

The Birth of the Bottled Water Industry

According to the Canadian Food Bureau, consumption of bottled water in Canada currently outpaces that of coffee, tea, apple juice, and milk. However, this wasn't always the case. As little as two decades ago, the industry was made up of a few local bottlers serving niche markets. Some estimate the bottled water industry's revenue growth at nearly 800 percent in the past 20 years.

In the 1980s, Clarke says, European food giants Nestlé and Danone had expanded as far as they could in Europe and set their sights on North America, "so they came in and bought up a whole series of the more productive and expanding bottled water operations."

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, as bottled water sales skyrocketed and soft drinks were linked to health problems such as obesity, Pepsi and Coca-Cola realized that there was a foreseeable end to the soft drink boom. They looked to juices and bottled water as the way of the future. Their entry into the bottled water market, however, was easier than their European counterparts'.

"They didn't have to buy up bottled water companies. They already had their own bottling operations and their big bottling plants. It was a question of taking advantage of that infrastructure, moving on that and getting some kind of a toehold into the market," says Clarke.

That "toehold" was based on access to publicly built, maintained, and funded water systems, and the result is two of the best-selling brands of single-serve bottled water in North America: Aquafina and Dasani.

Public Water For Private Gain

In the cases of Aquafina and Dasani, bottled water is no more than tap water taken from municipal supplies that is reprocessed and marked up for resale.

In the cases of Aquafina and Dasani, bottled water is no more than tap water taken from municipal supplies that is reprocessed and marked up for resale. To get an idea of how much this water is marked up, compare 1.5 litres of New York City tap water (often flaunted as some of the cleanest water in North America) and the same quantity of Dasani. New York tap rings in at about 1/100th of a penny. A bottle of Dasani, however, costs around $1.20. A 1999 Natural Resource Defence Council (NRDC) study titled Bottled Water: Pure Drink or Pure Hype? estimates that it costs "from 240 to over 10,000 times more per gallon to purchase bottled water than it does to purchase a gallon of average tap water."

Companies that use groundwater (or "spring water") have it a little harder than those who use municipal water, as they have to pay for drilling and infrastructure. However, they are not required to pay a fee or tax for extraction as they would for oil and gas.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, one Ontario water activist says, "They do pay for drilling and their own infrastructure, but notice that they are still accessing the water for free. A company takes a standard amount of one million litres per day. Each litre sells for $1.25, so gross revenues are half a billion dollars per year."

"I don't thing water should be priced," she continues. "Rather, private companies should pay hefty taxes for the privilege of temporary use, if they're to get it at all."

One of the reasons for a 2003 moratorium on new water permits in Ontario is that the province does not have a system to determine how much water is being extracted and whether permitted extractions are damaging the system.

The situation in Alberta is similar, says Diana Gibson, Research Coordinator at the Parkland Institute. "Alberta does not have an accurate inventory of ground water aquifers, nor do we know the rate at which those are being tapped or replaced." A current Natural Resources Canada initiative to map 20% of key regional aquifers by 2006 indicates a shortage of information in all regions.

Would bottlers be concerned if they did have that information? The Ontario activist is doubtful. "Our experience locally is that [water bottlers] use up aquifers and move on to new ones when those have run dry."

"Our experience locally is that [water bottlers] use up aquifers and move on to new ones when those have run dry."

But isn't it worth paying for a better product? Though the CBWA claims that "bottled water is held to stringent standards for quality, identity and labelling," Clarke and other water activists are quick to point to the NRDC report. This four-year study tested more than 1,000 bottles of 103 brands of bottled water and concluded that "about one-third of the waters tested contained levels of contamination – including synthetic organic chemicals, bacteria, and arsenic," and that bottled water "is not necessarily cleaner or safer than most tap water."

Add to this the environmental costs of manufacturing the components of plastic bottles, the bottles themselves, and what Clarke views as "the toxic chemicals and fossil fuel runoff of the biggest throwaway item there is," (plastic water bottles) and it seems water bottlers are getting away with more than price gouging.

All of this to transform water into... water.

The new consumer culture

The more we hear it, the more we come to believe that bottled water is a superior product. The more we accept that clean water is a luxury, rather than a right, the more we are willing to pay for it.

"By creating a consumer culture through bottled water you set the stage for people to accept and promote the privatization of water services," says Clarke. "It helps to have those water privateers directly engaged in the bottled water portion of things to start to facilitate that kind of development."

What Clarke is referring to is that some companies have their fingers in both pies, including one of the largest proponents of public-private partnerships in North America: Veolia (formerly Vivendi).

According to the Veolia Company Profile released in February 2005 by Public Citizen, Veolia is "concentrating on…contracts where the company can lease assets and collect revenue without being required to make any major capital investments in maintaining, expanding or rehabilitating the water system infrastructure. In other words, the public must pay for pipes, treatment plants and other infrastructure, and the company gets to make the money."

Like Dasani and Aquafina, Culligan fills its bottles and jugs with reprocessed tap water – in this case, tap water its parent company had already treated.

In May 1998, the city of Moncton, New Brunswick partnered with US Filter Canada and The Hardman Group Ltd. to build and maintain a new water treatment facility for the city. One year later, Veolia bought US Filter and its subsidiaries (including Culligan). Apparently Veolia's 85% share of the 20 year, $85 million contract was not enough.

Between 1999 and 2004 (when Veolia sold US Filter) the company not only treated municipal water, but also sold filtration systems and bottled water to residents of Moncton as Culligan. Like Dasani and Aquafina, Culligan fills its bottles and jugs with reprocessed tap water – in this case, tap water its parent company had already treated.

The Dangers of Privatization

When Chrysler moved out, so did the tax base of Highland Park, Michigan, dropping the population from 60,000 to 16,000, and leaving behind astronomical debts incurred by Chrysler and former residents. The state took the city into receivership, and through a series of business dealings, the city's water department was contracted out to CPI Engineering.

Highland Park is one of the poorest cities in the United States. Residents are also subject to one of the highest water rates in the nation. In 2003, over half of Highland Park's residents – many of them families with children and seniors – had been placed on shutoff status due to unpaid bills. Unpaid bills are added to property tax, and in many cases result in foreclosure on residents' homes. According to a June 2003 Earth First! media release, CPI employees were seen carrying firearms while shutting off people's water.

Public Citizen reports that in June 2004, while families were still being denied access to water, Highland Park City Council considered a proposed 10-year water management contract with Rothchild-Wright Group Inc. When it was revealed that the contract included an allowance for the company to bottle and sell water from the public reservoir, the proposal was hotly debated and ultimately rejected.

In Canada, privatization has not been an overwhelming success, either.

Hamilton, Ontario, privatized its system in the mid-1990s. Since then, the city has had numerous raw sewage backups and floods. According to a CBC report, in 2003 even city councillors were confused as to who, exactly, was running their water service due to numerous shifts in ownership, including a stint with Enron-owned Azurix in 1999.

In Halifax, Suez subsidiary United Water insisted that taxpayers pay for future failures (such as chemical spills). As a result, the city cancelled a $465 million contract in June 2003.

The Way of the Water Warrior

Water activists agree that there is a time and a place for bottled water. In times of crisis, such as drought or contamination, bottled water is crucial to sustain life. If, however, we come to rely upon bottled water as our sole source of hydration – as many people have – we risk losing a basic human right to life: clean water for all.

"While publicly operated water systems are managed to deliver clean, safe and affordable water to you and your family, privately operated systems are managed to get as much money as possible from you and your family," says Public Citizen. Clarke and the rest of the "water warriors" would likely extend that to the bottled water industry.

The Michigan meeting brought together many perspectives and presented many strategies for continued action on water issues. Many commonalities came to light, but the one resounding belief shared by all participants is perhaps best stated by the Sweetwater Alliance, a grassroots movement based in Michigan. "Fundamentally, we believe that life and the things that support it are sacred, and that it is vicious and wrong to exploit the needs of living things for private gain."

Manufacturers of bottled water are taking over municipal water systems while bottling public water for a profit, says Leah Orr

Extinguishing the Post Cold War Dream

Thu, 30 Sep 2004 20:02:50 +0000

World Bank-Mandated Energy Privatization Taxes Armenia's Poor

Late last month, an independent Armenia became a teenager. Food, fireworks and a festive atmosphere commemorated the 13th anniversary of its independence, declared on September 21, 1991. As the first Soviet republic to proclaim sovereignty during the collapse of the USSR, Armenians have reason to rejoice—after decades of cultural and political oppression they may finally flout their language, heritage and national identity without fear of reprisal.

A boy heading home from school in Karabagh, Armenia. photo: Rob Maguire

Many in this tiny republic, however, have little else to celebrate. While civil liberties were subject to Soviet-style constraints, the Armenia of the 1980s enjoyed a strong economy, a healthy and highly educated public, and one of the most egalitarian distributions of wealth in the USSR. Once the newly independent government began to adopt market reforms and neoliberal values, gross domestic product plummeted, prices for basic needs such as food and water increased dramatically, while public goods like health care and education began to crumble.

Over a decade later, GDP has finally returned to pre-reform levels. Who has benefited from renewed economic growth, however, is not so clear. Spending on education and health remains low. Real wages are less than one-eighth of what they were in 1990, and economic inequality in Armenia has become extreme. In Yerevan, Armenia's capital, the number of BMWs seen rolling along city streets has mushroomed; and so have the ranks of panhandlers roaming those very same urban boulevards.

Poverty has indeed become widespread in Armenia. Affecting roughly fifty percent of the population, it has quickly become an epidemic that shows little sign of subsiding.

An old man in Shushi, a village in Karabagh, a part of Armenia isolated from the rest of the country during long border disputes. photo: Rob Maguire

Living on less than two dollars a day, the poor are particularly vulnerable to increases in the price of basic commodities. Privatization within the energy sector, however, has preyed upon this very weakness. Imposed by the World Bank through loan conditions, reforms designed to make electric utilities more attractive to foreign takeover left people paying more than twice as much for electricity then they were in the mid-1990s.

Furthermore, inability to pay these inflated rates now results in disconnection. This strict marketplace logic is expressed by Andrei Rappaport, a senior official for Unified Energy System of Russia, and the new owner of several Armenian generating facilities: "If you want energy pay for it, and if there is not any money to pay, then goodbye."

Not unsurprisingly, these new conditions led to a serious decline in household energy consumption. The poor in particular were forced to cut electricity use considerably, by twenty percent on average. According to a World Bank report, the typical household barely has enough electricity to power a refrigerator and a handful of light bulbs.

Despite the decline in consumption, increased energy costs now account for approximately thirty percent of all household expenditures, with electricity making up the bulk of these payments. A related concern is the move towards greater wood consumption. While this reduces the reliance on costly electric power, it has also contributed to higher levels of indoor air pollution and accelerated deforestation.

Energy—widely recognized as a fundamental need for human development—has become increasingly inaccessible in Armenia. At the insistence of the World Bank, control over this precious commodity has been handed over to foreign interests, where social priorities are sacrificed in the name of corporate profit and capitalist ethos.

The picture is similar in much of the former Soviet Union: increases in cultural and, to a lesser degree, political freedoms have been overshadowed by a sharp decline in the freedom to meet basic human needs. This failure is directly related to the "shock therapy" imposition of market capitalism on countries with centralized economies—a prescription borne more of ideological zeal than sound economic principles.

Soviet leftovers, Yerevan. photo: Rob Maguire

Joseph Stiglitz, former Chief Economist of the World Bank, explains: "From this cold-war perspective, those who showed any sympathy to transitional forms that had evolved out of the communist past and still bore traces of that evolution must themselves be guilty of 'communist sympathies.' Only a blitzkrieg approach during the 'window of opportunity' provided by the 'fog of transition' would get the changes made before the population had a chance to organize to protect its previous vested interests."

Poverty and inequality remain Armenia's greatest challenges, and some question whether the political will exists to tackle these vital problems. This is true for the Armenian government, but perhaps more importantly, for the World Bank and related organizations such as the International Monetary Fund and the United States Agency for International Development. The coercive pressure these institutions place upon governments to engage in fire sale privatisation tactics could be redirected to produce publicly owned utilities that are transparent, efficient, and designed to serve the public good.

Unfortunately, these institutions appear more concerned with ideological imperialism and creating profit opportunities for Western corporations than they are with promoting sustainable economics, accountable governance, and poverty reduction—all of which are necessary for human beings to truly prosper.

Rob Maguire is a Canadian activist and graduate student living in Yerevan, Armenia. He can be found online at www.projectcommunis.org.

Rob Maguire reports from Armenia, where civil liberties have not increased quite as fast as the cost of living.

British Company to Raise Private Battalion

Wed, 25 Aug 2004 23:24:35 +0000

The Iraqi government's Army Transportation Command has awarded Aegis Defense Services of London a $293 million contract to raise a private battalion to provide armed protection for reconstruction projects in Iraq. The agreement charges retired Scots Guard Lieutenant-Colonel Tim Spicer with providing roughly 800 soldiers to act as 'close protection teams' for companies involved in oil, gas, and infrastructure development in Iraq.

Aegis Defence Services, which offers salaries up to three times that available in the British Army, is typical of the growing trend towards out-sourcing military services by nations. Some observers worry that an increased reliance on mercenary forces enriches those with political connections while eliminating avenues of accountability in the case of human rights abuses. Raising of military units by individuals at public expense has been a historical rule that was only broken by the nationalism leading up to the Second World War. Canada's own Lord Strathcona's Horse armoured regiment, which recently served in Afghanistan, began life as a cavalry regiment raised privately during the Boer War by businessman Donald Smith, Lord Strathcona. Others see the reliance on mercenaries as signifying the emergence of exceptions to the previously unquestioned global military dominance of the United States.

Privatization of Health Care Costly to Canadians: Study

Fri, 25 Jun 2004 17:05:42 +0000

A McMaster study just published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal shows that Canadians would pay an extra $7.2 billion a year if the federal government decides to fund private health care with public money. The study lists profit, larger executive bonuses, and more administration costs as the top three reasons why the system would cost Canadians so much more money.
Gordon Guyatt, the NDP candidate running in the Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale riding, is one of the ongoing study's researchers. Since the NDP is the only mainstream party that is solidly against health care privatization, a bias could easily be associated with the study. However, the study is exhaustively based on eight others involving over 350,000 patients that were treated in both not-for-profit and for-profit US hospitals between 1980 and 1995. As well, two Harvard professors, in writing the editorial accompanying the study, praised the study as "meticulous."

The Conservatives have said that they will not oppose provinces that decide to privatize health care. Alberta premier Ralph Klein has already stated that that on June 30--immediately after the election--he will introduce changes that will allow for more private health-care options in Alberta. The Liberals say they prefer to keep health care public, but a variety of private services are already being provided without much opposition.

» Hamilton Spectator: Private Health Would Cost $7.2B More

Disappointment and Outrage Over Federal Budget

Wed, 07 Apr 2004 01:43:10 +0000

Paul Martin's budget has angered anti-poverty groups and student with loans. photo: Tooker Gomberg

Every federal budget has been attacked from opposition parties and other interest groups, and this will likely always be the case. However, the Liberals' March budget seems to have especially outraged a wide range of groups who are trying to help the people who are becoming, due to events like this budget, more and more marginalized.

The NDP's Jack Layton argues, for one thing, that by privatizing Petro-Canada shares, the government is squandering any chance it could have at shifting subsidies from polluting to clean energy. Layton also argues that the lack of attention to real health care reform by the budget will inevitably lead to hospital privatization.

The Canadian Housing and Renewal Association (CHRA) says that the budget needed to do something fast for affordable housing, but it did not happen. The CHRA says that Canada needs to start producing 25,000 affordable housing units a year in order, and the budget, while paying lip service to the problem, does not come close to making affordable housing a reality.

The Canadian Federation of Students (CFA) says that the budget's increase of student debt allowances (estimated at being approximately $35,000 at the end of a four year degree compared to the current $25,000) does nothing toward making post secondary more accessible to the disadvantaged. What is really needed, says the CFA, is a system that will lower tuitions, or at least freeze them; the higher debt allowance will only serve to raise tuitions, it claims.

Finally, the National Anti-Poverty Organization (NAPO) is upset that there is so much emphasis on debt reduction at the expense of the poor. Ignoring social housing, child poverty, and EI reform will simply accelerate the rich-poor divide, says NAPO. It also points out that the growing poverty issue that the budget does nothing to fix will end up costing otherwise avoidable billions in social spending (such as health care, the prison system, etc.).

» Rabble.ca: Martin's budget: we live in two different worlds

» National Anti-Poverty Organization: Obsession with Debt Precludes Action on Poverty

Privatization in South Africa: Starting Over

Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:11:58 +0000

An anti-privatization activist argues with police guarding the installation of prepaid water meters in Soweto. photo: Indymedia South Africa

In 1996, post-Apartheid South Africa adopted its remarkably progressive constitution, which granted all citizens the basic right to housing, water, health care, and other essentials. In an equally remarkable about-face, the African National Congress (ANC), the governing party of former president Nelson Mandela, has adopted a program of privatization.

For the poor in South Africa, things are in many ways worse now than under Apartheid. In 2003, South Africa beat out Brazil for the distinction of having the largest income gap between rich and poor of any country in the world.

For South Africa's poor, privatization has had disastrous results. While advocates of privatization claim that for-profit water systems will increase efficiency, opponents point out that private firms don't bother to repair inadequate infrastructure in poor townships, preferring to focus on areas that yield higher profits. "Whatever one believes," one critic points out, "the poor have no say in the matter."

In 2000, thousands of people who were no longer able to afford newly raised water tariffs turned to other sources for water. Because almost all of South Africa's surface water is unsuitable for consumption without treatment, the result was one of the largest outbreaks of cholera in the nation's history.

Due to rising rates that accompany privatization, electricity has become similarly inaccessible for thousands of families. Due to various calculations, electricity is more expensive in poor townships than it is in rich--and usually white--areas.

Less than a decade after the end of Apartheid, the tactics of resistance developed over decades of racial oppression have become useful again. The Soweto Electricity Crisis Committee has led a successful campaign called Operation Khanyisa (from Zulu, meaning "to turn on the light"). Teams of volunteer electricians rewire homes that have been cut off because families cannot afford the "privatized" rates--which can be five times higher than in the recent past. Hundreds of thousands of homes have been reconnected, as new "electricians" are trained. Similar campaigns have begun to reconnect access to water in poor neighbourhoods.

When private security forces--nicknamed "red ants" for their red overalls--are sent to evict people from homes, large crowds are mobilized in order to physically block the eviction. Evicted families are also moved in by force. Lack of housing and overcrowding are major problems, with thousands of people living in makeshift shacks built in yards.

Other tactics have been traditionally straightforward: a large crowd is mobilized to present a list of demands to politicians, and attempt to shame them into halting privatization plans by referring to the constitution and past promises. When frustration runs high, a more direct approach has been taken: an angry crowd travels to a politician's house and disconnects the power and water. One such encounter led to one of Johannesburg Mayor Amos Masondo's bodyguards firing on a crowd of angry demonstrators.

In some cases, direct action has had significant results. The Treatment Action Campaign has forced a reticent ANC government to provide treatments to many infected with HIV. Similarly, the Soweto Electricity Crisis Committee won the cancellations of debts to the power company and halted power disconnections.

Trevor Ngwane of the Anti-Privatization Forum says that the campaigns are "more or less keeping things where they are" in terms of privatization. "This is having the effect of the social movements beginning to realize their own limitations and starting to look for real and long-lasting solutions."

The problem, according to Ngwane, is a lack of "clear class politics." "The ANC is doing what the old National Party could not do," he explains, "because it can hide behind its struggle credentials and the peoples trust of Nelson Mandela to get away with theft and murder."

Ngwane claims that the problems with the ANC have deep historical roots. The ANC began, he says, in 1912 "as an organisation of 'educated' Africans and enlightened chiefs who wanted equal rights for themselves because they were 'civilised,' unlike the rest of the the 'natives'."

While the ANC adopted the radical rhetoric of the 1960s, with Mandela calling for a "turn to the masses," Ngwane says that the belief that "the interests of the exploiter can be harmonized with that of the exploiter" remained fundamental.

The problem today, Ngwane says, is that there are very few viable political parties that do not support capitalism--even the South African Communist Party stands in support of the ANC. Political parties will make promises to the poor, he says, but the only way these promises are fulfilled is through the ongoing struggles of the people affected by capitalism and the attendant privatization.

Additional Reading:

» The Dominion: Interview with Trevor Ngwane

» Research Paper: Altering Water Privatization in South Africa: Adapting Social Resources for the Poor

» Canadian Labour Congress: Privatization Can Cause More Problems Than it Solves - Lessons From Africa

» Yellow Times: Water privatization in Africa

» Republic of South Africa: Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 1996

» ZNet: What went wrong in the 'New South Africa'?

» In These Times: Guerrilla Technicians Challenge the Privatization of South Africa's Public Resources

» Agence France-Presse: Tens of Thousands of Marchers Gather Against Privatization in South Africa

» New Left Review: Trevor Ngwane: Sparks in the Township

Less than a decade after the end of Apartheid in South Africa, popular resistance movements are growing again. This time, the enemy is privatization.

Canadian News

Mon, 22 Dec 2003 22:41:48 +0000

Farms Produce More, Earn Less: Farmers' Union

Faemers say they are contantly sttaining greater efficiency, but all possible profits are taken by powerful agriculture technology corporations and declining prices from nearly-monopolized buyers.

A report released last week by the Farmer's Union of Canada says that while revenues have increased on a per farm basis, actual income is quickly approaching zero.

The report, entitled "The Farm Crisis, Bigger Farms,and the Myths of'Competition' and 'Efficiency'" says that farmers find themselves in a double bind. They must constantly invest in technology and expansion todeliver more produce for less money, but must also make do with falling prices.

Most farmers, the report says, "arestruggling with the worst farm income crisis since the 1930s."

Prices paid to farms have held steady since the 1960s, while all other prices have gone up. The price of a loaf of bread, for example, has more than tripled since 1975. By contrast, wheat prices have hardly changed during the same period.

The report finds similar trends in corn and cornflakes, barley and beer, and hogs and porkchopspork chops. In each case, the price of the processed product has more than tripled, while the commodity itself has stayed at aconstant low price.

The Farmer's Union pins these trends on elementary principles of economics. While economies of scale result in greater efficiencies, the resulting large entities hold a greater concentration of power.

This, according to the studies cited by the report, can result in higher prices despite lower costs of production. "Given the opportunity to charge less, but also the power to charge more, corporations will act predictably."

Under "free trade" deals like NAFTA, Canadian family farms must compete with each other and with farmers worldwide for a very small number of powerful buyers.

In Canada, for example, two multinationals pack the vast majority of Canadian beef. Similar concentrations exist in almost all sectors.

While multinationals consolidate control over distribution through mergers, the report argues, farmers are constantly forced to compete with more of the world.

Shortly after the report was released, Maple Leaf Foods began a takeover of Schneider's, a move that would give the corporation control over 80% of slaughter capacity in both Manitoba and Saskatchewan. Independent hog farmers say the deal will take away "even the pretext of competition".

Dru Oja Jay

National Farmers Union:

* * *

Martin Axes Housing Minister, Creates Privatization Czar

Upon taking office as Prime Minister, Paul Martin hasundertaken a radical cabinet shuffle. One of his most radical changes has been the elimination of the secretary responsible for housing. Mississauga MP Steve Mahoney, previously in charge of housing, was dropped from cabinet along with his job. Responsibility for the housing portfolio will fall to Environment Minister David Anderson, a move the Toronto Star called an "odd fit".."

Housing activists say that the change indicates a de-emphasis on affordable housing. Murray Dobbin, author of CEO for Canada, called it a cynical move, since "Martin eliminated all federal funding for social housing" while Finance Minister. The Prime Minister has said that he intends to "build a society based on equality, not privilege."

Meanwhile, Martin has created a new position: "Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance with special emphasis on Public Private Partnerships (P3s)." Covered by almost no major media outlets, the new position will be filled by John McKay, an MP from Scarborough East. Little information is available about the position, but in a news release the new "P3 Czar" named "affordable housing" and "electric power" as being among several areas that could benefit from P3 deals.

P3s involve offloading government services onto private-sector firms. P3 advocates say that the deals are necessary when governments don't have enough money to fund important projects. Opponents claim that P3s are significantly more expensive in the long term, move government funds to the private sector, and provide a short-term excuse to cut social programs. (Toronto Star, John McKay, MP)

Press Release:

Toronto Star:

* * *

BC Great-Grandmother Chooses Jail Over Promise not to Protest

Betty Krawczyk will spend Christmas in jail, declining an offer of parole in exchange for a promise not to protest anymore. The 75-year-old great grandmother was arrested while protesting the logging of numerous forests in British Columbia.

Krawczyk has previously spent a total of two years in jail for various other protests, and will likely not be released until mid-February. She is launching a Charter of Rights challenge to the fact that she was charged with criminal contempt of court, as opposed to civilecivil contempt, which carries lighter sentences.

Increasingly, those arrested en masse at demonstrations in Canada are finding they cannot get out of jail without signing away their right to protest. Some activists have been denied the right to associate with certain people in order to get out of jail; others have travel restrictions. (Canadian Press)

Canadian Press:

International News

Mon, 22 Dec 2003 22:23:21 +0000

Uruguay Votes Against Privatization

Uruguayans at a rally opposing an IMF-backed plan to privatize the nationally-owned oil company. Photo: Indymedia Uruguay

In a referendum on the privatization of Ancap, the Uruguayan national oil company, Uruguayans voted decisively to keep the company's monopoly on oil import and export. In a plan backed by the International Monetary Fund (IMF)-a body that grants loans to countries when certain conditions are met-the government had decided to terminate Ancap's control over oil in Uruguay in order to make it more efficient.

The opposition campaign noted that Ancap provides the government with a substantial part of the income used to fund pension plans, health care, and education. The IMF has considerable clout in Uruguay due to the country's massive foreign debt, most of which is left over from the rule of US-backed military dictators in previous decades.

San Francisco Indymedia Center

* * *

Cost of Climate Change to Exceed Global GDP by 2065: Study

Insurance companies in the US and UK are increasingly questioning their ability to insure against weather-related catastrophes. According to the Reinsurance Association of America, insurers paid $57 billion for weather-related losses in the first half of the 1990s. In the whole of the 1980s, they paid $17 billion.

With weather-related damages growing by 10 per cent per year over the last decade, insurance companies are increasingly refusing to insure vulnerable areas like Florida and the Caribbean. A report released by the Chartered Insurance Institute of the UK estimated that economic losses from extreme weather will exceed the global Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by 2065.

In recent years, climate scientists have increasingly concluded that human-created greenhouse gas emissions cause global warming, leading to increased occurrence of "extreme weather events." (Engineers Australia)

Engineers Australia:

* * *

Unions Banned in Iraq

As many as 7 million Iraqi workers-70 per cent of the country's workforce-do not have jobs. Those workers who have hoped to find security or improved situations by forming unions have been disappointed in recent weeks by the US-controlled Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) enforcement of a Hussein-era law banning the formation of unions in state-owned enterprises. Currently, most working Iraqis are employed in such enterprises.

The CPA has also passed a measure to hold anyone who "incites civil disorder" as a prisoner of war, a charge that many Iraqis say could be interpreted in order to target union organizers. According to an Iraqi organizer interviewed by phone, one union office experienced a raid by 10 personnel carriers and Humvees. Files and equipment were seized from the office of the Transport and Communications Workers union, and organizers were arrested and held without explanation overnight.

US Congress recently appropriated $87 billion for the reconstruction of Iraq. None of the money was set aside for unemployment relief. Most Iraqis employed by CPA earn $60 per month, which many say is not enough to provide the bare essentionals for a family. Many of the firms with reconstruction contracts shy away from hiring Iraqis, prefering to bring in subcontractors from Pakistan and India.

Many Iraqis have expressed alarm over the US policy of rapid privatization aimed at attracting international investment. The manager of one oil refinery claimed that if his firm were privatized, he would have to lay off 1500 of his 3000 workers. "In America, when a company lays people off, there's unemployment insurance and they won't die from hunger. If I dismiss employees now, I'm killing them and their families." (The Progressive, Pacific News Service)

Z Magazine:

Pacific News Service:

* * *

Indian Court Orders Coke to Stop Depleting Water Supplies

The top court in the Indian state of Kerala has ordered Coca Cola to stop drawing groundwater. The court said that the Coca Cola bottling plant, which used 400,000 gallons of water daily, was depleting groundwater in the area, leading to a regional water shortage. (ENN)

Environmental News Network:

Canadian News: December 1

Tue, 02 Dec 2003 04:18:40 +0000

Ontario Liberals Proceed with Private Hospitals

Ontario health care activists are claiming that two planned "Public Private Partnership" (P3) hospitals in Ontario will be more expensive, not publically controlled, and represent a dangerous step towards privatized health care.

The plan for the Ottawa and Brampton hospitals--which will be financed, owned and operated by private companies--was designed by the Conservative government two months before the Ontario provincial elections. Under the unprecedented agreement, private firms will provide services that are not directly clinical, such as cleaning, laundry and maintenance.

Kevin Armstrong of the Ontario Health Coalition argued that such services may appear to be "ancillary", but are integral to the quality of care provided. Armstrong also called the P3 project "vastly more costly" than publically funded and controlled initiatives, due to the need for profits and higher interest rates that come with private-sector financing. The bottom line, he said, is that "hospital funds are going to be diverted to profits". A recent report on P3 hospitals released by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives found that privately run hospital services were 10% more expensive over the long term.

A spokesperson for the Ontario Ministry of Health said that the plan was going forward to meet an "urgent need", but would not directly respond to questions about anticipated costs or public consultation. The recently elected Liberal government has repeatedly affirmed its commitment to halt "creeping privatization" in health care. Conservative MPP John Baird was quoted as saying: "on first glance it looks pretty identical to the deal that Ernie Eves announced here two months ago, so from that standpoint we're thrilled".

Dru Oja Jay

* * *

30,000 Protest Charest's Cuts

30,000 citizens and trade unionists made the long trip to Quebec City to protest cuts to social programs. Recently elected premier Jean Charest recently announced plans to overhaul Quebec labour laws.

Workers at the protest accused Charest of making things worse for workers while making few improvements. Many decried recent cuts to social programs, such as Quebec's sucessful $5-a-day day care, which is now up to $7-a-day. The Liberal government has also suggested cuts to education and health care would "bring Quebec into line" with the rest of North America.

Dru Oja Jay

* * *

Community shows support for Fredericton MP

Fredericton MP Andy Scott participating in a Knit-in For Peace on International Women's Day in Fredericton. photo: Andrea Markey

Despite drizzle in the air, close to 100 people joined together for a candlelight vigil Friday evening in support of Fredericton MP Andy Scott. The vigil took place in front of the Justice building in downtown Fredericton, where, only hours earlier, Terrance Curtis entered his pleas on four charges in relation to an assault a week earlier that left Scott bruised and shaken. Curtis will undergo a 30-day psychiatric assessment. Curtis' wife said Curtis is against same-sex marriage.

After a five-minute silence to start the vigil, people took turns expressing their support for Andy Scott, their concerns, and their determination to make a united stand for equality.

Greg Daborn, of Moncton, New Brunswick, is the Atlantic (male) representative for EGALE Canada who traveled to Fredericton for the vigil. "We need more politicians like Andy Scott", he said. A former grade-school classmate of Scott"s agreed. "I was so proud of Andy the day he cast the deciding vote in Parliament", Kim Hill said.

The Moderator of the United Church of Canada, Peter Short, sent his support for Scott and those at the vigil via e-mail to be shared with the crowd. "I hope for the day when all duly elected representatives in our country will be free to exercise their judgment on behalf of the people without violence or intimidation. Our vigilance is not only for Andy and for those with whom we might agree but for the freedom and integrity of our democracy", Short wrote. "Please accept my gratitude for your public witness and be assured of my support for Andy."

While the feelings of solidarity and strength were in the air Friday evening, vigil organizers said there were people missing from the crowd due to fears of intimidation and retaliation. Those at the vigil emphasized a need "to mobilize a lot more people-a mobilization for freedom of existence."

"The circle here tonight represents a new bond we have formed-it will never be broken", Daborn told the crowd.

Andy Scott and his family have reportedly received death threats.

Andrea Markey