BECAUSE its current contemplation on privatization or so-called public-private partnership (PPP) will not solve the deep-seated problems it faces now.
Privatization and PPP are essentially the same because the net effect is the loss of the government’s effective control over water service utility, an important state asset.
Privatizing water service utility to a private corporate interest is abandoning its duty to protect the right of the consumers to adequate, safe and cheap water.
There could be two reasons for Baciwa’s move to privatize or go into a so-called joint venture.
One, it is a recognition of its poor capacity to manage, and as a result of two decades of mismanagement, it could already be mired in debt and its only way out is to allow private corporate interest to take over.
Facts tell us that Baciwa has already incurred millions in loan supposedly intended for the improvement of its water system and services. Still, many people ask what has happened to its multi-million modernization. Why is it still short of some four million liters of water per day for its consumers, not to mention its huge pilferage problem?
Not providing the public with enough, clear and sound answers on the first, its local officials have sent overtures that Baciwa plans to get more loans up to a billion for its need to rehabilitate and improve its production and distribution systems.
But what is the guarantee services that will get better with added loans? Well, if it is not mismanagement, what do we call it?
The other reason could simply be a result of government’s pursuance of a neoliberal policy of liberalization, deregulation and privatization that like those in energy, mining, banking, and other state utilities already privatized, water service utility should also be offered in the altar of local big business in cahoots with their patron multinational corporations.
In a privatized environment, the private corporate interest is profit, not service, or maybe they could really improve better service but at a higher cost to consumers.
Like privatization, PPP in the form of joint venture or other schemes is just a euphemism to allowing private corporate interests to play business with our water system with its own rules.
It is anchored on the premise that private corporate interest is better in public asset management than the government.
This is, of course, a perverted and myopic argument.
The government can do better than a private corporation if it truly wills.
The government has enough experts and talents to do what a private corporation could do. In fact, it could do better because it is in control of the laws and regulations.
The government’s usual drawback is only having officials who are as corrupt as the ravenous profiteers of the big business corporations.
But this does not change the fact that private corporate interests do not have the monopoly of capacity and skills in running strategic service utilities such as power, water, mining, etc.
The government is just being kowtowed by its own corrupt legislators and officials who also own big corporations in the country.
On one hand, they decry government intervention in business and exhort themselves to limit to policy direction, a collection of taxes, giving of token social services and donations, while on the other hand, their big companies are cornering government contracts and utilities for their insatiable desire for more profits and super profits.
Privatization, PPP or joint venture are all concepts that will further deprive our consumers access to water, and our government loses control over an important strategic service utility.
“Sila rin ang gumigisa sa gobyerno sa sarili nitong mantika at sila rin ang nakikinabang.” What a hypocrisy and lies.
Instead of privatization, or PPP, or joint venture, the government, national and local, the Baciwa union, and consumers organizations, should help strengthen Baciwa improve its management systems, and also its production and distribution, and collection systems.
Instead of allowing so-called experts, consultants and private big contractors to determine life for Baciwa, the different stakeholders, should organize themselves into some kind of water councils in the city and barangay levels to help set policy and implementation strategies, and provide even labor equity in all Baciwa rehabilitation and improvement programs.
This is a mass movement in the water industry, a paradigm that will empower consumers and producers alike, not the private corporate interests.
(For feedback, email ombion.ph@outlook.com)