TOPICS

Marseille: Water again between Life and Death

Marseille: Water again between Life and Death


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

By Elizabeth Peredo Beltrán


Things are going badly because they have left the most important decisions about life and the planet to corporations and powerful and developmental governments that, based on the principle that everything is bought, paid for, sold or repaired by paying, have led to the limits the impossibility of building a caring society, caring for the environment and above all respectful of a sacred good for life such as Water.

15 years have passed since the first version of the World Water Forum and 20 of the Rio Declaration. During those years the World Water Council led by companies such as Veolia, Suez, Cocacola, Monsanto and other large transnational companies have developed a very sophisticated vision of water, a vision that is based on the concept that water is a commercial good necessary for life and ecology, functional to human rights and survival, therefore ... a great business.

In all that time, instead of improving the care of sources and aquifers around the world, the situation has worsened substantially. The ecological balances necessary for the survival and fluidity of the hydrological cycle have been broken like never before, due to large-scale agribusiness processes, mining pollution and energy projects based on the construction of huge hydroelectric plants, among some of its causes. For their part, companies are increasingly seeking to gain ground from public management and debates continue between public managers versus businessmen and corporatist diplomats who try to convince us that the role of private companies is inevitably necessary for water management. In these debates and agreements on global water governance, it intends to delegitimize public management and strengthen the concept that was developed by the Washington Consensus: the development and fulfillment of the Millennium goals will only be possible if there is strong private investment, therefore both development, human rights and ecological balances are left to the fate of the market.

This principle has allowed the construction of a high-flying speculative system that is now being reinforced with the development of the green economy, which is more of the same, but designed to create speculative markets with an added green tint to give the feeling that it is being protected. the planet and with the intention, this time, to commodify everything; not only the water we drink and even the air we breathe but even the future of the planet. Although it may seem like science fiction, this is possible just as it has been possible that scandalous technical and corporate solutions have been promoted from this Forum a few years ago and are now being put into practice.

In The Hague, the 2000 World Water Forum proposed to encourage the creation of transgenic seeds to "save water" under the diagnosis that agriculture uses the most water in the world. At that time, water activists claimed that this solution could constitute a crime that could affect the health of the whole world and they activated campaigns to avoid transgenic seeds and include the precautionary principle on these technologies. Today, transgenic seeds are part of the world food trade and its technologies and inputs; this week Argentina is proud to present to the world the patenting of a new transgenic seed capable of "saving" water in the production of wheat, corn and soy worldwide.

Things are going badly because they have left the most important decisions about life and the planet to corporations and powerful and developmental governments that, based on the principle that everything is bought, paid for, sold or repaired by paying, have led to the limits the impossibility of building a caring society, caring for the environment and above all respectful of a sacred good for life such as Water.

The World Water Forum has consistently refused to support the Human Right to Water and Sanitation in its statements. At the World Water Forum in Mexico in 2006, only 4 countries signed a minority declaration demanding the human right to water, including Uruguay and Bolivia. However, in the UN two years ago there was not a single vote against Resolution 64/292 declaring the Human Right to Water and Sanitation, the countries that opposed could only abstain from voting but not make explicit their refusal to an obvious consensus generated from the peoples and from the countries that know that this is an inalienable right for humanity.


How is it possible that the FMA systematically denies this right and that in the UN it was approved without opposition two years ago? Since it is the same countries that are part of the ministerial declarations on the one hand and the Resolutions and Conferences on the other? Why is it that now that after such an important step in the multilateral system of the United Nations, the FMA does not recover the achievement and rather seeks to go back and reduce the possibilities of implementation of the human right to water by deriving it from the privatization processes? Furthermore, now the FMA is firmly focused on including water in “all its economic, social and environmental dimensions within a framework of governance, financing and cooperation”… as stated in its declaration issued yesterday and forced despite the protest of some countries . How can states end this kind of conference and forum schizophrenia?

Meanwhile, thousands, if not millions of experiences and initiatives of social and solidarity management, successful experiences of public management are aimed at signifying water as a common good, a non-commercial good for life.

The policies and visions promoted by the World Water Forum are not up to the challenges posed by the planet and the dilemmas of humanity and on the contrary are condemning the management of water to its management by corporate powers unable to prioritize life, concerned rather with how to continue to extract profits even where there are none, from financial and speculative systems to litigation systems sheltered in international financial institutions.

Considering the extreme depletion of nature, of common goods and the ecological imbalance produced on the planet, it is essential that water governance should be left out of the hands of the World Water Council and be built from the consensus of citizens, of the peoples and the public interest. That is why the social movements in Marseille are proposing that the UN convene a Global Water Forum, leading a process that perhaps makes it possible to listen to the voices of the people to think about water as a common good for the lifetime. The truth is that social organizations and ordinary people are asking that local systems be strengthened and that they contribute to an effective exercise of social and community vigilance to ensure that their management is social, democratic and supportive.

It is said not without reason that "Thousands have lived without love, none without water" (Auden). We add from this Forum ... "Without Love, without Empathy or Solidarity, it will be impossible to ensure that the water arrives clean and safe for everyone ..."

Elizabeth Peredo Beltran

Written for FAME, Marseille, 2012


Video: Venezuela. Most Dangerous City on Planet. How People Live (June 2022).


Comments:

  1. Molner

    It is a pity that I will not be able to participate in the discussion now. I don't have the information I need. But I will be happy to follow this topic.

  2. Reidhachadh

    Both all?

  3. Mahdi

    You have quickly thought up such matchless answer?

  4. Ruelle

    Also what in that case to do?

  5. Moogugal

    One can say infinitely on this question.



Write a message