Corruption Floats in Water Sector Worldwide

Where there is big public spending and no transparency, there is corruption. And while no public/private sector is safe from malfeasance, the ever-increasing demand for clean water opens the floodgate to covert practices in which billions of dollars leak into the coffers of individuals and private companies worldwide with little trickle effect.

Investment in the delivery of clean water is always viewed as a high priority, creating costly infrastructure projects like damns that are rife with opportunity for squander. The pain of this financial abuse is hardest felt in impoverished communities worldwide, where up to 30 per cent of funds allocated by international financing institutions (IFI) like the World Bank are dribbled away through corruption.

At World Water Week (WWW) this past week, Reporter Hannah Stoddard interviewed a panel consisting of private industry and non-profit sector activists. Amongst her guests were:

• Teun Batermeijer, Manager of the Water Integrity Network (WIN),
• Ramisetty Murali, Convenor for the Freshwater Action Network (FAN), and
• Thomas van Waeyenberge, Representative, International Federation of Private Water Operators (Aquafed)
  

All three guests agree that while plans made at large governance discussions like the WWW are academically useful, they are separated from the practical reality of the practices on the ground.

Batermeijer and Murali urge the creation of greater transparency both through the protection of whistle blowers and increased local control. They call for the creation of institutionalized mechanisms of accountability and regulation to bare pressure upon the politicians and bureaucrats responsible for taking bribes.

The Federation of Private Water Operator's van Waeyenberge said, “Corruption is a part of every discussion that we should be having." He argued that while private industry is a part of the problem, it can also be part of the solution. Private brokers are under constant pressure to root out corruption and as on the ground implementers of public policy, they could share their experiences on successful policies dealing with corrupt officials. However, van Waeyenberge balks at regulation and the consortium that he represents would prefer an independent regulatory body which may be less susceptible to fraudulent influence than a government run entity. He suggested that the various water stakeholders develop more trust with one another and forge an alliance against corrupt practices.

Murali and Batermeijer urge the international financing institutions (IFI) to monitor the water industry and make it more transparent and accountable so that journalists and activists can highlight inefficiencies and expose culpable parties, both public and private.

According to Murali, “Naming and Shaming” is easier when only one individual is involved; when it is a nexus of vested interests: politicians, bureaucrats, both ruling and opposing government parties, private sector companies and individuals, it is much more difficult and personally dangerous to ferret out the truth. Batermeijer also said that climate change will increase the need for regulation and oversight as demands become more acute.

Hannah Stoddart, reporter for the Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI) interviews a panel of water experts from both public and private sectors in this audio clip.

Slumdog Millionaire and Green Economics

by Richard Lawson

Went to Weston super Mare last night and watched Slumdog Millionaire. With 9 other people in the whole cinema. Like a private viewing.

Best film I have ever seen in my life. Partly because I do not get out much, but up there with Dancing with Wolves. And my assessment is untouched by the Oscars hype.

A story of a slum child answering a set of questions based on his tragic experience of life. A unique fusion of social realism and escapist dreams. A critique of failed economics, police brutality, criminal brutality, and the lies and insincerity of the celebrity culture.

It has been criticised for the term "slumdog" (well, OK) and as "Poverty Porn". "Porn"? Porn satisfies the desire of some people to see sexually exciting images. Who wants to see images of poverty? Rather, the establishment wants to have these images hidden from popular consciousness. India is a country where poverty, defecation and death are not hidden, but in yer face. "Wealth porn" is what is behind the culture of celebrity throughout the world, where people watch the antics of spiritually poor rich people, and lust after their life style. Slumdog is a negation of wealth porn. If that is poverty porn, then so be it, and so much the better for the film.

The real criticism of the film is the fact that the child actors are still living in the slums.
The director Danny Boyle has set up a trust fund, but it is structured in a way that does not fully benefit the actors and their families now. We should ask that a substantial slice of the film's profits go to benefit not just the actors and their families, but also their whole community and street children everywhere. There is evidence that the film has increased donations to Railway Children, a charity that works with street children in Mumbai. You can donate on line. Think in terms of how much you paid to see the film.

Charity giving is good and necessary, but the real question is an economic and political one - how to prevent the universal buildup of slums and favellas around the great cities that are growing throughout the world.

Dom Helder Camara said "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist".

I had better start by saying that I am a Green, not a Red, as one of the founders of Greenpeace mentioned during the course of a police beating, a comment that is supposed to have been one of the first uses of the word "green" to indicate the new ecological political ideology. But I digress.

What is the solution to the problem of the underclasses, of which the "slumdogs" are the most blatant example?

First, the existence of absolute poverty is an affront to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which begins with the words: All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.


For this reason all governments must work to eliminate this poverty and exclusion, as part of their Responsibility to Protect.

How? This is not my main field, but here are five suggestions off the top of my head.

First, by reducing the factors that drive people to the cities, of which the foremost is rural poverty. This should not be impossible. The food of the cities comes from farmers in the countryside, so they have a vital commodity to sell, but they are not getting a fair price for it. Part of that problem is the pressure from mega food corporations, who are buying up land for mono-culture food production. Corporation taxes and other restraints will be needed to offset this problem.

Second, the people actually in the slums need a productive economic role. They already have a horrible role: they pick over the rubbish dumps - a foul, health and dignity destroying job. Instead, they can be the recyclers, picking up streamed waste from the prosperous parts of town, sorting and selling it. I saw this happening in Sao Paolo, with scores of guys pulling trailers of sorted waste.

There is other good work for them to do - like laying drains and building composting toilets in their own neighbourhood.

And so on. There is no need for unemployment and poverty in a green economy.

Third, by giving everyone a Citizen's Income. It sounds radical, to give every citizen a basic income, sufficient for necessities. The idea has been around for a long time, and is making slow progress. If a state can afford things like bonuses, bailouts and bombs, it can afford a basic income. Indeed, it has a duty to do so. The central objection to the CI is "It is a liggers charter" "You cannot give something for nothing". (No? What about the bailouts then?). The effective way around this objection is to introduce it via a Green Wage Subsidy. Exactly what is needed in the present economic situation. (Pity that the Handbrake Tendency succeeded in blocking it in Green Party Conference last year).

Fourth, a Social Contract between Government and people: Government undertakes to provide food and basic necessities for every citizen, if the citizens undertake to limit their families to replacement value. This is probably going to provoke a storm of criticism, but it is based on a perfectly sound, self-evident truth: it is impossible to expand forever into a finite space. It is simple realism.

Fifth, we need to address the inherently divergent tendencies of free market fundamentalist capitalism, for the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer. We need a localised, mixed economy with a guided market.

Amazing what comes up when you see a good film, isn't it. I should get out more often.

President of Casey Foundation, Poverty Measurements Need to be Re-examined

What is an American Standard of Living? The President of the Casey Foundation asserts that a re-examination of the poverty threshold polidcy established in the '60's must be conducted in order to address the concerns today.

Poverty, a Loaded Term, Requires Re-examination

The federal poverty standards do not reflect the realities of those living at middle class or poverty levels. The definition of middle class has become cloudy as more and more from the middle class find themselves just a paycheck away from a financial crisis. These are two excerpts from the site, http://www.youtube.com/user/spotlightonpoverty where you can find out more on the topic.



The current testing for poverty in the United States is woefully out-of-date, according to Casey Foundation President Douglas Nelson, who testified before Congress in mid-July. There is no accounting for the costs of childcare, transportation and more and these discrepancies fail to properly profile the risk in which children and youth of lower socio-economic groups are placed.