Barroso
administration: Golden medal in serving interests
A
research by the Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO)
“Through
the course of the crisis, attempts by corporations and corporate
lobby groups to influence EU policies have probably been more
successful than ever, in part due to a close relationship with the
Commission.”
“Corporate
Europe Observatory has gathered a lot of evidence over time and
covering many different areas that shows how the Commission is easily
captured by corporate interests. This report is an attempt to produce
a condensed version of how the Commission has come to act on behalf
of corporations over the past five years, focusing on climate
policies, agriculture and food, finance, economic, and fiscal
policies.”
6
- Water privatisation: Corporations over citizens
Key
findings
“More
than 80% of water supply and sanitation networks in the EU are
publicly run, but for 20 years the Commission has been under strong
pressure from private water companies to find ways to force public
authorities to outsource these networks’ management to the private
sector. The Barroso II Commission did not depart from its
predecessors’ habits of carefully listening to these demands and
doing what it could to satisfy them. The most scandalous way it
did just that was through the 'Troika', imposing the privatisation of
water supply in crisis-hit countries such as Portugal and Greece as
conditions for their financial rescue. The Directory General for
Economic and Financial Affairs (ECFIN) of the European Commission is
part of the Troika together with the EU’s Central Bank and the
International Monetary Fund, and in this setting the Commission can
dispense from respecting EU legislation as these 'aid' deals are not
made within the EU’s legal system.”
“As
a consequence, water supply systems were almost entirely privatised
in Portugal, and the privatisation process is ongoing in Greece’s
two largest cities, Athens and Thessaloniki. Ireland also had to
introduce water pricing for the same reasons (Irish citizens were
previously getting water free of charge), and Italy came under strong
pressure after a national referendum that saw 96% of voters oppose
water privatisation laws.”
“Within
the EU legislation, a new threat to the public water sector by the
Commission appeared in the form of a directive on concession
contracts, a widely used form of outsourcing in the water sector.
Developed by Internal Market Commissioner Michel Barnier (French),
the proposal’s stated objective was to 'harmonise' legislation.
However, it soon became clear that the proposal would severely limit
possibilities for public-public partnerships and other forms of
cooperation between public institutions, as well as force many public
companies with a mixed capital to organise EU-wide tenders. Heide
Rühle, a green MEP, described it as 'market opening and increased
pressure towards privatisation'. Very critical media reports on
the plans sparked outrage in Germany and Austria: hundreds of
thousand citizens in these two countries signed a European Citizens
Initiative
[http://ec.europa.eu/citizens-initiative/public/welcome?lg=en] organised by public sector unions demanding the implementation of the
right to water and the exclusion of water systems from the internal
market, making it the first ever successful ECI. Eventually, the
German government itself intervened and the Commission had to exclude
water from the scope of the directive, to the fury of the private
water companies’ lobby.”
“The
Commission’s push for privatisation is even more remarkable in that
it goes against what happens on the ground in Europe and around the
world in the water sector. Paris and many other cities have recently
remunicipalised their water services due to negative experiences with
privatisation. The Dutch government in 2004 passed a law banning
private sector provision of water supply and the Italian
Constitutional Court ruled that any future legislation attempting to
privatise public services would be unconstitutional. Unfortunately,
the Commission seems to either ignore these facts or only consider
them as unjustified barriers to privatisation.”
Related:
Totally dominant lobbies in a downgraded Europe – (part 5)
Totally dominant lobbies in a downgraded Europe – (part 7)
Totally dominant lobbies in a downgraded Europe – (part 8)
Totally dominant lobbies in a downgraded Europe – (part 9)
Totally dominant lobbies in a downgraded Europe – (part 7)
Totally dominant lobbies in a downgraded Europe – (part 8)
Totally dominant lobbies in a downgraded Europe – (part 9)
Comments
Post a Comment