Wednesday, July 06, 2011
Las turbias aguas de la privatización en México
Las secciones de esta publicación incluyen una discusión de las diferentes formas de privatización del agua y los estudios de tres casos: Saltillo, Guadalajara y el Distrito Federal.
La Coalición de Organizaciones Mexicanas por el Derecho al Agua, el Instituto Mexicano para el Desarrollo Comunitario, Food and Water Watch y Council of Canadians invitan a conocer “Las turbias aguas de la privatización en México”.
Autoras: Claudia Campero Arena y Cindy McCulligh
La revista está disponible en su versión electrónica en:
http://www.comda.org.mx/files/REVISTACOMDA.pdf
Labels: Agua cd. de México, Privatización del agua, Temacapulín, Water privatization
Tuesday, March 01, 2011
Organizaciones civiles y sociales advierten sobre la propuesta del Jefe de Gobierno de incrementar de la participación privada en el servicio de agua en la Ciudad de México
México D.F., a 1 de marzo de 2011
BOLETIN DE PRENSA
- Demandan que se difunda y se abra un amplio debate sobre la iniciativa de Ley para descentralizar el Sistema de Aguas de la Ciudad de México que incluye la intervención del sector privado en el suministro y dotación de agua potable.
- Denuncian mínimos avances en la implementación del Programa de Derechos Humanos del D.F. en lo relativo al derecho humano al agua.
- Reiteran exigencia de información precisa y una evaluación sobre los contratos con empresas privadas desde 1993 antes de volver a firmar convenios con las mismas.
El pasado 24 de febrero, se publicó una nota informando que: “El jefe de Gobierno del Distrito Federal, Marcelo Ebrard, envió a la Asamblea Legislativa una iniciativa de ley para descentralizar el Sistema de Aguas de la Ciudad de México (SACM), en la que se plantea la intervención del sector privado en el suministro y dotación de agua potable.”
Ya en agosto de 2009 Ebrard había hecho pública su intención de ampliar la participación privada en el manejo del agua en el Distrito Federal. La Coalición de Organizaciones Mexicanas por el Derecho al Agua solicitó mayor información y un debate público al respecto. En el foro público “La privatización del agua y sus impactos” el 26 de octubre de 2009, el Lic. Miguel Ricaño reiteró que no existía una propuesta formal y que no había intención de privatizar los servicios del agua en la Ciudad. Esta misma respuesta también se recibió por escrito a través de solicitud de información[1].
En el contexto de la grave crisis hídrica de la Cuenca del Valle de México, que se agudiza año con año, es imperativo plantear alternativas integrales, bien estructuradas y ampliamente consensadas con todos los actores sociales y con la población. Es evidente que la participación del estado y su rol como garante de los derechos humanos y, en particular, del derecho humano al agua amerita ser claramente definido. Por ello, no debe menospreciarse el esfuerzo realizado en el marco del Programa de Derechos Humanos del Distrito Federal (PDHDF)[2]. Lanzar una iniciativa sin considerar las líneas de acción a las que se ha comprometido el gobierno de la Ciudad en dicho Programa plantea una ambivalencia y da un mensaje contradictorio a la ciudadanía.
A más de un año de aprobado este Programa no hay avances en las líneas de acción relacionadas con las empresas que participan en el manejo de agua y las tarifas, aún en aquéllas que no requieren de mayor esfuerzo por parte del SACM. En este instrumento se establece que se debe hacer pública y accesible toda la información relativa a las empresas concesionarias que operan en el DF; también se debe promover un amplio proceso de participación para aportar a una nueva evaluación de los contratos de 1993 a 2009 que sirva de base para la toma de decisiones relativa a la renovación o celebración de otros contratos. Asimismo, se debe conformar un espacio amplio de reflexión y discusión sobre la reestructuración de las tarifas de agua, asegurando que ésta se haga de conformidad con los instrumentos internacionales de derechos humanos[3]. Estos compromisos implican únicamente el cumplimiento de las disposiciones sobre acceso a la información pública, la transparencia y la rendición de cuentas.
Además, resulta preocupante que el Gobierno del Distrito Federal ignore las repetidas demostraciones, en México y en el mundo, del fracaso de la participación privada en los servicios de agua potable y saneamiento. Las dos premisas principales por las cuales se promueve la participación privada – una supuesta mayor eficiencia e inversión – han sido desmentidas por estudios realizados tanto por académicos como por organizaciones de la sociedad civil. Incluso el Banco Mundial, una agencia promotora de la participación privada en el manejo del agua, admite que la experiencia demuestra que no ha habido mayores logros en inversiones. En Cochabamba – Bolivia, Dar es Salaam – Tanzania y Yakarta – Indonesia, se han sufrido las consecuencias de demandas millonarias de las empresas a los gobiernos, servicios que empeoran, cobros indebidos y tarifas impagables. En Aguascalientes la empresa liderada por Vivendi se fue a la banca rota y fue “rescatada” por el gobierno, lo que significó un subsidio a la empresa con dinero público cuyo monto se mantuvo en secreto.
Desde 1993, el Distrito Federal tiene contratos de servicios de agua con cuatro empresas que progresivamente han realizado funciones de levantamiento del padrón de usuarios, lectura de consumos, emisión de boletas y recepción de pagos. Ahora el ejecutivo local propone profundizar la participación de la iniciativa privada sin antes publicar una evaluación imparcial del desempeño que estas empresas han tenido hasta la fecha y un documento claro que muestre porqué esta propuesta pudiera ayudar a mejorar la gestión del agua en la ciudad.
Demandamos congruencia del Gobierno de la Ciudad de México que proclama públicamente un fuerte compromiso con el medio ambiente y los derechos humanos, incluso a nivel internacional, mientras que en los hechos promueve la participación privada en la gestión del agua por encima de la participación pública, no ofrece información e impulsa numerosos megaproyectos que ponen en serio riesgo las pocas zonas de recargas que han quedado en la Cuenca del Valle de México.
Coalición de Organizaciones Mexicanas por el Derecho al Agua:
- Agua, Trabajo, Servicio y Vida A.C.
- Alianza Mexicana por la Autodeterminación de los Pueblos (AMAP)
- Asistencia Legal por los Derechos Humanos A.C. (ASILEGAL)
- Centro Mexicano de Derecho Ambiental, A.C. (CEMDA)
- Centro Derechos Humanos “Fray Francisco de Vitoria, O.P.”, A.C.
- Centro de Servicios Municipales “Heriberto Jara, A.C.”(CESEM)
- Centro Operacional de Vivienda y Poblamiento, A.C. (COPEVI)
- Colectivo Radar
- Comunidades Campesinas y Urbanas Solidarias con Alternativas (COMCAUSA A.C.)
- Consejo de Ejidos y Comunidades Opositores a la Presa La Parota (CECOP)
- Desarrollo, Educación y Cultura Autogestionarios, Equipo Pueblo
- Enlace Rural Regional, A.C. (ERRAC)
- Espacio DESC
- Food First Information and Action Network- México (FIAN-México)
- Guardianes de los Volcanes, A.C.
- Instituto Mexicano para el Desarrollo Comunitario, A.C. (IMDEC)
- Movimiento Mexicano de Afectados por las Presas y en Defensa de los Ríos (MAPDER)
- Otros Mundos, A.C.
- Red de Género y Medio Ambiente (REGEMA)
- Red Mexicana de Acción frente al Libre Comercio (RMALC)
- Unión Popular Revolucionaria Emiliano Zapata (UPREZ)
Aliado internacional:
- Oficina para América Latina de la Coalición Internacional para el Hábitat (HIC-AL)
Para mayor información:
Claudia Campero 044 55 30 15 63 66 claucampero@yahoo.com
Brenda Rodríguez Herrera 044 55 29 36 79 85 brendtzu27@yahoo.com.mx
[2] La Jefatura de Gobierno publicó el 26 de agosto de 2009 en la Gaceta Oficial del Distrito Federal, el Acuerdo por el que se establece la obligatoriedad del PDHDF para las Dependencias, Órganos Desconcentrados, Delegaciones y Entidades del Distrito Federal. Además el 24 de febrero del presente se promulgó la Ley del PDHDF.
[3] Ver las líneas de acción 776, 777, 779 y 761 completas en el PDHDF disponible en: http://www.derechoshumanosdf.org/portal/
Labels: Agua cd. de México, Water privatization
Friday, September 18, 2009
Water Privatization Threat in Mexico City
Published by Food and Water Watch
Mexico is a country facing staggering water problems. Pollution, scarcity, and lack of access to safe water throughout the country have united many Mexicans into a broad movement in recent years. Now, residents of Mexico City, such as myself, are seeing a new challenge to our already compromised access to a reliable supply of clean water.
Water scarcity has been in Mexico City’s headlines for several months. Since January of this year, there have been increasing scheduled cutoffs from the Cutzamala system, one of the most important supplies of drinking water for the city. The Cutzamala system is a huge complex of dams, pumps and pipelines that transports 16,000 liters of water per second 1,100 meters up and over the mountains and then 90 miles to the taps of Mexico City.
The main rationale for the scheduled cutoffs is extremely low rainfall in 2008 and now in 2009. In an attempt to raise awareness of the need for water rationing, the city government has launched an extensive campaign in the subway, radio and newspapers that announces: “February 2010: The city may be left without water. Mexico City is living its worst drought in its history. There is water left only for the next 6 months. It is not a warning, it is a reality.” This is, of course, a very serious statement. But the City’s response to date has merely served to increase inequities in water service without addressing the heart of the matter.
Since the alarm has been repeatedly sounded, the “progressive” government of Mexico City has proposed some solutions to manage this crisis, but most of the proposed solutions fail to address the larger problem -- massive mismanagement of the city’s water.
The first proposed solution is the water cutoffs. Many poor neighborhoods now receive water only at certain times of the day, some only every other day or even once a week. It is not only the poor who are affected; increasingly, the rationing is spreading to new areas, including middle class neighborhoods.
The second solution is a wide-spread campaign targeting citizens to “save water,” by practicing conservation in the home. Naturally, water should be used wisely; but if you consider that many people do not have enough water already, the demand to use even less adds insult to injury.
The third solution put forward by the local government is a proposed increase in water tariffs, which will soon come before the city’s legislature for approval.
On a positive note, there are some proposals around rainwater harvesting and repairing leaks. These would be crucial elements in any plan to manage the crisis, given that Mexico City’s pipes suffer a leakage rate between 35 and 40 percent, and the amount of rainwater that is currently collected is next to none.
However, the final proposal is the most disturbing: the recent announcement to increase private participation in the city’s water management.
Since 1993, four companies have held service contracts in water management in four sections of the Federal District. Each of these companies is made up of 51 percent Mexican companies and 49 percent multinationals, such as Veolia Water and Suez Environment. The contracts include responsibility for user registration, metering and billing.
On August 20th, Mexico City Mayor Marcelo Ebrard announced that there will be further private participation in water management. Although he didn’t provide details, we know that the proposal includes giving bulk water to private companies to distribute and that in addition to their previous responsibilities of metering and billing, the companies will now be responsible for repairing pipes and reducing leakage. However, not all the city’s delegaciones (regional areas that make up the city) will participate in this scheme. The five with the biggest technical and social challenges (most populated, with issues around quality and quantity, subsiding soil, etc.) will remain under the authority of the city government.
What worries water activists most is: 1) the lack of precise information about this proposal, and 2) the empirical experiences in Mexico and the rest of the world that prove that private water management does not bring the promised efficiency. In fact, these companies have been repeatedly incapable of complying with their contracts. Even when companies fail to meet contract obligations, examples from Buenos Aires to Paris to Dar es Salam, Tanzania show that remunicipalization is an incredibly difficult process.
The Coalition of Mexican Organizations for the Right to Water (COMDA) has expressed its concerns regarding this proposal. The many failures of private water management, both national and international, cannot be ignored. Every water struggle is unique, and the struggle here will be complicated by the city’s severe crisis of human-provoked scarcity; but residents of Mexico City need to learn from experiences elsewhere to demand that the local government take real responsibility for meeting the demands of its citizens.
–Claudia Campero
Mexico is a country facing staggering water problems. Pollution, scarcity, and lack of access to safe water throughout the country have united many Mexicans into a broad movement in recent years. Now, residents of Mexico City, such as myself, are seeing a new challenge to our already compromised access to a reliable supply of clean water.
Water scarcity has been in Mexico City’s headlines for several months. Since January of this year, there have been increasing scheduled cutoffs from the Cutzamala system, one of the most important supplies of drinking water for the city. The Cutzamala system is a huge complex of dams, pumps and pipelines that transports 16,000 liters of water per second 1,100 meters up and over the mountains and then 90 miles to the taps of Mexico City.
The main rationale for the scheduled cutoffs is extremely low rainfall in 2008 and now in 2009. In an attempt to raise awareness of the need for water rationing, the city government has launched an extensive campaign in the subway, radio and newspapers that announces: “February 2010: The city may be left without water. Mexico City is living its worst drought in its history. There is water left only for the next 6 months. It is not a warning, it is a reality.” This is, of course, a very serious statement. But the City’s response to date has merely served to increase inequities in water service without addressing the heart of the matter.
Since the alarm has been repeatedly sounded, the “progressive” government of Mexico City has proposed some solutions to manage this crisis, but most of the proposed solutions fail to address the larger problem -- massive mismanagement of the city’s water.
The first proposed solution is the water cutoffs. Many poor neighborhoods now receive water only at certain times of the day, some only every other day or even once a week. It is not only the poor who are affected; increasingly, the rationing is spreading to new areas, including middle class neighborhoods.
The second solution is a wide-spread campaign targeting citizens to “save water,” by practicing conservation in the home. Naturally, water should be used wisely; but if you consider that many people do not have enough water already, the demand to use even less adds insult to injury.
The third solution put forward by the local government is a proposed increase in water tariffs, which will soon come before the city’s legislature for approval.
On a positive note, there are some proposals around rainwater harvesting and repairing leaks. These would be crucial elements in any plan to manage the crisis, given that Mexico City’s pipes suffer a leakage rate between 35 and 40 percent, and the amount of rainwater that is currently collected is next to none.
However, the final proposal is the most disturbing: the recent announcement to increase private participation in the city’s water management.
Since 1993, four companies have held service contracts in water management in four sections of the Federal District. Each of these companies is made up of 51 percent Mexican companies and 49 percent multinationals, such as Veolia Water and Suez Environment. The contracts include responsibility for user registration, metering and billing.
On August 20th, Mexico City Mayor Marcelo Ebrard announced that there will be further private participation in water management. Although he didn’t provide details, we know that the proposal includes giving bulk water to private companies to distribute and that in addition to their previous responsibilities of metering and billing, the companies will now be responsible for repairing pipes and reducing leakage. However, not all the city’s delegaciones (regional areas that make up the city) will participate in this scheme. The five with the biggest technical and social challenges (most populated, with issues around quality and quantity, subsiding soil, etc.) will remain under the authority of the city government.
What worries water activists most is: 1) the lack of precise information about this proposal, and 2) the empirical experiences in Mexico and the rest of the world that prove that private water management does not bring the promised efficiency. In fact, these companies have been repeatedly incapable of complying with their contracts. Even when companies fail to meet contract obligations, examples from Buenos Aires to Paris to Dar es Salam, Tanzania show that remunicipalization is an incredibly difficult process.
The Coalition of Mexican Organizations for the Right to Water (COMDA) has expressed its concerns regarding this proposal. The many failures of private water management, both national and international, cannot be ignored. Every water struggle is unique, and the struggle here will be complicated by the city’s severe crisis of human-provoked scarcity; but residents of Mexico City need to learn from experiences elsewhere to demand that the local government take real responsibility for meeting the demands of its citizens.
–Claudia Campero
Labels: Water privatization
