Volume 10, No.2 - March 2001

We're part of the union

Cholera and water privatisation

Cholera: We need free clean water - privatisation will not provide it

By Josephilda Nhlapo-Hlope, COSATU Social Policy Co-coordinator

Cholera is not just a health issue. Its link to unclean water and the lack of sanitation, make it a social disease, whose basic cause is poverty. As the 1997 White Paper on Water and Sanitation says: "The lack of services such as water supply and sanitation is a key symptom of poverty and underdevelopment."

The current epidemic broke out in rural Kwazulu-Natal in August 2000. By 10 February 2001, 103 people had died and over 44,295 were infected. The 103 reported dead are those who made it to hospital; many more may have died at home, or tried to get to hospital but because of the bad terrain and lack of transport did not arrive.

The Department of Health and the World Health Organisation claim that the low fatality rate of less than 1% shows that their interventions have been successful, as in some Cholera epidemics fatality can be up to 50%.

The situation is still grave however. Currently over 1000 new infections are being reported daily, compared to 100 a day at the beginning of the epidemic. Cholera has spread to Gauteng and Mpumalanga and is likely to spread to other provinces, the Eastern Cape being the most vulnerable.

Origins of the epidemic

No one can trace the origin of this epidemic. Sudden large outbreaks like this are caused by a water supply containing the cholera bacteria. The Department of Health says:

"Cholera is endemic to the eastern seaboard of Southern Africa and the possibility of an outbreak will always be a consideration in areas without clean water supplies and no sanitation.

There is also a possibility that this strain of cholera lies dormant in river estuaries, preserved by the salinity [saltiness] of the water. When environmental conditions are right and the salinity reduced, then the water can be infected"

The Department of Health admits the epidemic is likely to get worse before it gets better. This is bad news for anyone but especially for women, who because of their productive and reproductive roles have to look after the sick, and have to go even longer in search of treated water, or firewood to boil the water.

There is resistance to drinking chlorinated water because of the taste and the cost of Jik. Sometimes, especially after rains, the tankers with clean water cannot reach the remotest parts, meaning the women have no alternative but to use contaminated river water.

Not only is cholera a gender issue; it is also a racial issue because of its direct link to poverty. 98% of whites have access to clean water at their homes, compared to 27% of blacks. In rural areas only 2% of blacks have such access. As can be expected not one white or any other racial group has died in this epidemic. Even in the 1980-1997 cholera epidemics, only 27 whites were infected with compared to 30 138 African.

Government's response

The best way of preventing Cholera is to have clean, treated water and effective sanitation to help prevent re-infecting water sources by human waste and for people to practise good hygiene.

The Government has reacted to the outbreak by providing 231 clean water tanks, serviced by 60 tankers running daily and establishing 56 rehydration centres. There have been educational campaigns through the media, posters printed, pamphlets distributed. Even house-to-house visits are planned.

The Department itself acknowledges however that giving people knowledge does not necessarily guarantee a behavioural change. Schools and teachers were targeted in the hope that children will put pressure on parents to change behaviour, especially since changes in water consumption and sanitation involve extra labour or extra costs.

Even if this campaign were successful, it will not solve the fundamental cause of the disease - poverty. Many people simply have no access to clean water, because the infrastructure is non-existent or underdeveloped or they lack the money to pay for access. Research by the Rural Services Development Network shows that not enough tankers have been deployed to reach the rural areas.

COSATU's response

Access to water is central to a long-term solution to the Cholera crisis - and it is a right, enshrined in the constitution's bill of rights. COSATU urges the government to make this right a reality by providing every household to receive its first 50 litres of water free and the rest billed with a block tariff.

To raise the funds for this COSATU proposes the Government should increase its budgetary allocation for comprehensive social security, raising funds by: · Modest increases in progressive taxes, especially personal income tax.

South Africa is actually undertaxed, compared to both developed and developing countries. An independent analysis points to the possibility of substantial increases in progressive taxes, notably personal and corporate income tax.

• A modest rise in government borrowing.
• The government could increase its deficit target to, say 5%, to release an additional R5 billion. Business economists claim that such higher government spending inevitably reduces private investment, leading to economic stagnation. But there is no historical evidence for this in South Africa.
• Virtually all studies show a close positive correlation between government spending, especially on infrastructure, and private investment.
• Reprioritisation and more efficient use of government expenditure, Finding better ways to fund public servants' pensions and reducing military expenditure.

Privatisation

Privatisation is not the preferred option for delivering clean water. The public sector must be the key supplier, in line with the National Framework Agreement and the Water Services Act of 1997 Section 19.2, which should not be amended as the private sector are demanding.

Privatisation of water services has posed many problems even in developed countries where there is already a basic water infrastructure and the major tasks are simply maintenance, upgrading and minor extensions. How much more problematic could the privatisation of water be in South Africa, where we face massive inequalities and huge backlogs in service delivery?

In order to deliver in South Africa, where the apartheid system deliberately ensured that the majority live in abject poverty, the state needs to be a developmental state playing a significant role in the economy and society and not handing over to private companies.

Decisive measures to address poverty will require substantial additional expenditure by the state as well as a review of delivery mechanisms in local government and the parastatals.

The cholera epidemic has given us an opportunity to mobilise across divides, bringing civil society to lobby government to free resources and accelerate delivery of social services.

Privatisation not working in Nelspruit

In Nelspruit, a consortium, led by Biwater, a British company, was brought in to run the water services. Since the contract was signed, in 1998, not much has been done and there are numerous complaints from residents:

• They have no access to water;
• Their water is being disconnected;
• Tariffs are too high;
• Households are getting inflated bills for water based on meter readings though they have never seen a meter reader in the township.

Some residents don't have meters. When they complain to the council refers them to Biwater. Biwater tell them the meter reading has been out-sourced to another private company. This company allegedly claims it does not have to respond to complaints from the community. Privatisation has made the lives of the Nelspruit worse, not better.

Access to adequate water should not be based on ability to pay. Poverty is over 50% and 71% in rural areas, where infrastructure is least developed.

If access to water is now to be based on ability to pay, more than half of the population will not have access to clean water.

Amanzi kuwonke wonke! Phantsi Jo'burg Water! Phantsi Suez-Lyonnaise!

By Anna Weekes, SAMWU Media Spokesperson

Privatisation is not going to work in Greater Johannesburg either. The Council has privatised its water to a French multinational company - Suez-Lyonnaise, which has a bad track record in other countries.

• In Budapest, Hungary, it won the water contract although its prices were higher than other bidders'. Why? Because Suez-Lyonnaise paid the council millions of rands. Is this not bribery?
• Jérome Monod, chair of Suez-Lyonnaise, served as Secretary General of the French right-wing party RPR, and mayor of Paris in 1985 when he privatised water supply and sanitation to his own company, which then charged very high prices for water. When auditors were brought in to investigate, the company tried to cover up by issuing false financial reports, claiming their profit margin was 250% lower than it was! Is this not corruption?
• In Casablanca, Morocco, when Suez Lyonnaise took over the city's water and electricity in 1997, prices rose three times in the first year!
• In Chile, Suez-Lyonnaise ran the Santiago water company and insisted on making a profit of 33%.
• In Colombia, Suez-Lyonnaise refuses to allow workers to join a union.
• In Brazil, there are allegations that the company discriminates against black workers. · Rostock in Eastern Germany privatised its water and sewage systems to a company part owned by Suez-Lyonnaise. Two years later water charges increased by 24%, and sewage levies by 30%.
• The worst story comes from Grenoble, France. In 1996, a former mayor and senior executive of Suez-Lyonnaise both received prison sentences for receiving and giving bribes to win the water contract but only after civic groups fought a ten year court battle to kick them out.

What has Suez-Lyonnaise promised for Johannesburg?

• It has decided to call itself JW (Johannesburg Water). JW has not come up with any plan to extend running water to Johannesburg's poor. All they have said is that they will "improve services". We want written promises of free water!
• When cholera was discovered in the Jukskei River in Alex, the only thing Suez/JW did was to check up on the chemical toilets in the area. They did not take any steps to provide clean water, so that people could stop using the river. In fact, the company encouraged the council and the MEC for Housing to remove the residents.
• Nobody has seen the contract between the Council and Suez-Lyonnaise! In the Eastern Cape, Suez-Lyonnaise's subsidiary, WSSA, insisted on a secrecy clause in the contract to prevent any member of the public from seeing it. This is unconstitutional and not in the interests of the public.

Johannesburg residents are going to be getting very high water bills in the months to come. SAMWU calls upon everyone to join the campaign for affordable, public water with at least 50 litres per person per day free! We believe in water for needs and not for profit!

Free services in the Western Cape a lie - residents evicted!

By Lance Veotte, SAMWU Water Co-ordinator

The South African Municipal Workers Union was shocked to receive calls for help from citizens of Zwelihle, Hermanus. Despite promises of free services bandied around during the local government elections campaign, the Democratic Alliance council has started to evict families from the area.

The DA has lauded Hermanus for having a progressive block tariff for water, which supposedly allows the indigent to pay an affordable amount. This has been exposed as a lie now that families are being evicted for not being able to pay their entire water bills.

The houses of seven families from Zwelihle were to be auctioned off. They were paying as much as they could for water but could not afford to pay the full amount. The bank attached their houses and they faced being booted out onto the street.

Six families have already been evicted. SAMWU has received reports that up to ten more will be evicted every month until all families with arrears are homeless. Most families in Zwelihle will soon be destitute.

The union believes these evictions are an act of intimidation. There is no way the families who already cannot pay for a basic human right will be able to fork out the thousands now demanded from private lawyers who have added on massive interest.

According to information the union received, the council's Treasury Department and a few DA Councillors took the decision to evict the families - not a full sitting of newly elected councillors.

Now the DA has turned its attention to Tefelsig, where, on 27 February almost all the water had been cut off. In the past weeks community members had been arrested, evicted, and now are deprived of water.

An 18-year old other was separated from her 5-month old baby during an eviction where the mother was arrested for trespassing. Last year during a round of evictions an 80-year old woman hit the headlines when she suffered a heart attack after being subjected to violence by security guards.

The council is willing to use the strongest tactics possible to drive tens of families completely out of Tafelsig and onto the streets, where they will join the ranks of the homeless.

This makes a complete mockery of the DA's election promises to provide free basic services to the citizens of Cape Town. It is also illegal since the constitutional court ruled last year in the Grootboom case that families cannot be evicted where children will be left without shelter, as the state has a duty to provide shelter to children and their parents.

"It seems that the only real contact the Democratic Alliance has with working class communities is when its leaders are canvassing votes based on false promises, or giving instructions to security guards to terrorise poverty stricken people," said SAMWU General Secretary Roger Ronnie.

SAMWU is calling for all councils to fulfil their election promises of free basic services by leaving people in their homes so they can access these services. The union has brought the Hermanus problem to the attention of the Water and Forestry Affairs Minister Ronnie Kasrils. Water is an issue of dignity and basic human rights which the DA clearly has no problem with trampling upon.

SAMWU is going to lend its support to the legal action being planned against the Unicity by the Anti-Eviction Campaign.

For more information contact the Anti-Eviction Campaign on the scene - Michael Blake on 021 397 7727, Faizel Brown on 082 5457883; or the SAMWU Media Officer on 083 714189

Danger to the environment

The basic services proposed by government do not fulfil public health and environmental conditions as stipulated in the RDP and there may be terrible environmental implications, for example:

• Densely-packed latrines in urban areas - likely to contaminate local water supplies, requiring expensive purification;
• Low quality storm water drainage - could lead to flooding, erosion and the washing of human waste into surface water;
• High level of contamination of water when inappropriate vessels are used to fetch water from communal taps to households.