Water trade ›from left› granma

CNN warned, on September 7, that access to water is in crisis. “The world is in dire need of water. Drought and rising temperatures threaten to affect nearly every essential sector of the economy, from energy to agriculture to shipping.”

Faced with such a dramatic beginning, one should expect, logically, the media’s interest in what this means in human and social terms; But no, because this context is a business opportunity that should not be ignored. The title of the article is not wasted: Water is scarce. The market should take notice.

In the face of the global catastrophe caused by water scarcity, the transnational media focus that the shares of water-related companies are rising, which is a golden opportunity for the investor.

“The S&P Global Water Index, which tracks 50 companies worldwide involved in water utilities, infrastructure, equipment and materials, has outperformed the S&P Global Market Index by more than three percentage points since its inception in 2001 (…). This year, the S&P Index has been Water is nearly five percentage points higher than its global counterpart.” If you don’t understand, what he’s saying is that investing in water is more profitable than other economic sectors: above, make a profit from the water disaster as a rare commodity.

“With the increasing demand for clean water, related companies are poised for growth in the coming years,” said Tianen Cheng, President of S&P Dow Jones Indices. The numbers do not fail. According to the World Economic Forum, cited by the article, the global water industry is worth about $413 billion, and in the past five years, 23 special water investment funds have been launched with an estimated capital of 8 billion, according to data from the Morning Star.

One would think that a lot of money going into this topic could be good at reversing the crisis situation. Don’t be naive.

The United Nations recently reported that 16.2 million people in the Horn of Africa (Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia and Eritrea) are at risk of dehydration, including 2.8 million children. According to the World Health Organization, up to 40 million infants are in a weakened state due to this cause. It doesn’t mean the opposite is where the investment money goes.

But things don’t get that far. The misrepresentation of the system could be more pessimistic. In 1992, during Menem’s presidency, Argentina’s water services were privatized. With the arrival of Nestor Kirchner’s government, special concessions were closed after service rates were frozen.

The companies complained to the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), a body of the World Bank, that, in 2010, considered that the Argentine government had acted against the companies, by not allowing them to charge more water. And imposed on the country, for compensation to the private sector, a payment of $ 1.2 billion. Argentina has been fined for not allowing private companies to charge its residents more water for water. Take accounts.

In 1997, the Bolivian government awarded a water management concession in Cochabamba to a company controlled by the Yankee Bechtel Corporation. At the same time, a law was passed giving the company a virtual monopoly on all water sources, including irrigation, communal systems, drinking water, and even rainwater collected from homes — no lie.

The first measure of Yankee adoption was to raise the price of access by 35%. The Bolivian people rose up in protest and the government was forced to terminate the concession. The company sued the state and had to reach a closed settlement with private capital. Bolivia was punished for not maintaining the privatization of even collected rainwater.

The World Bank finances projects to expand access to water for governments and localities that need it; But one of the conditions for obtaining this financing is that it includes private companies. Let us not expect anything less from an apparatus of neoliberal global capitalism.

According to Global Health Analyst Beauty Dlamini, “In Africa, water privatization reforms can be described as ‘recolonization’ due to the dominance of international capital over this privatization.” Keep counting.

But the problem is not only in poor countries. Margaret Thatcher opened UK water services for privatization in 1989. In the first year, access to liquid became 46% more expensive. In 1994, as many as two million Britons reported being unable to pay their water bills, and another million were in arrears. In England, nine private companies that control the water business owe £48 billion. That amount means £1.3 billion in interest paid to them, in 2019 alone. Instead of investing the profits into improving the country’s water management system, companies have paid their shareholders £2 billion a year, on average, since privatization. business tour.

Capitalism is not a system of owners, it is a system of the underprivileged. Let’s not forget that.