On The Business Of Water

ON the 23rd of this month I attended a three-hour public workshop organized by the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung in Windhoek.

The topic for discussion was: Water supply in Namibia and the concept of full cost recovery. Four panelists; from Namwater, Windhoek Municipality, NUNW and the organization of Senior Citizens and Destitute; were in attendance and each of them was given an opportunity to air their views on this very sensitive issue.After listening to all their speeches I, rationally and morally, found myself in 100% agreement with the officials from NUNW and OSCD.Their standpoint was unequivocally spelled out: the poor citizens of Namibia who cannot pay their water bills have their inalienable and constitutional rights to be supplied with water.But the Namwater and the Municipality officials were adamant that everybody who uses water must pay for it because they operate on the Full Cost Recovery basis.This means that Namwater and the Municipality of Windhoek do not take into account any other factors when it come to supplying water to its citizens except the factor that “water is business just like other business”.Are the poor tragically falling on their own defensive spears? The Municipality of Windhoek is headed by the representatives of the people who were directly elected into their positions by the people of Namibia.These municipal officials are supposed to be the socio-economic spears of the people and demolish poverty on their behalf instead of nailing them to the cross of destitution and desperation.Namwater is a public enterprise that, on behalf of the government, is supposed to ensure that all the citizens of this country are watered, not with hopelessness, but with that crystal blue liquid.But instead of doing so, both Namwater and the Municipality of Windhoek are trying to make a lucrative business out of this public commodity.Their argument that all people, irrespective of the financial abilities of individual citizens being taken into consideration, must fully pay for their water to ensure that they can recover all the costs involved in supplying this water is the most irrational argument I ever picked up from the mouth of seemingly rationally educated people.During this workshop none of the participants even bothered to ask a question like, Are the exorbitant salaries and allowances of the employees of Namwater and Municipality not the substantial component of the costs of supplying the water that Namwater and Municipality try to impose on the poor citizens through their pathetic full recovery approach?Another question that one may be tempted to ask is: what is the central government’s position on this issue?If the government can tolerate the Full Cost Recovery strategies of Namwater and Municipalities, it then must take on a legal obligation of subsidizing the water and electricity supply of the poor and destitute citizens.There are those who claim that it is difficult to identify the poor.Is this really so or are we trying to simply say that we, and our “sound economic principles” approach, can do without the poor?After all, I have never come across an economic theory, even those from the most talked about Free Market System, which advocates the exclusivity of the poor in its application.This is because the fundamental underpinning of any economic theory is the sustainablity of its application.This simply shows us that the unconditional full cost recovery strategies of water payment being applied by Namwater and the municipality are subversively contradicting economic principles and are therefore economically unjustifiable.Article 45 of our “democratic bible”, i.e. the constitution of the Republic of Namibia, states that “The members of National assembly shall be the representatives of all the people and shall in the performance of their duties be guided by the objectives of this constitution, by the public interest and by the their conscience”.Are the members of parliament, constitutionally mandated to be in full control of the government, really doing their work if some of the people they represent get denied access to water simply because they are poor?Is their silence and ignorance of these crucial issues an indication of people being guided by public interest and by their conscience?It is quite sad that the socio-economic victims in the present day Namibia, under a government of black Namibians, are, ironically, the very same people who were the greatly affected victims of the former apartheid regime, the ordinary black Namibians.David Uuyuni Wa Kamati Hakahana – Katutura WindhoekFour panelists; from Namwater, Windhoek Municipality, NUNW and the organization of Senior Citizens and Destitute; were in attendance and each of them was given an opportunity to air their views on this very sensitive issue.After listening to all their speeches I, rationally and morally, found myself in 100% agreement with the officials from NUNW and OSCD.Their standpoint was unequivocally spelled out: the poor citizens of Namibia who cannot pay their water bills have their inalienable and constitutional rights to be supplied with water.But the Namwater and the Municipality officials were adamant that everybody who uses water must pay for it because they operate on the Full Cost Recovery basis.This means that Namwater and the Municipality of Windhoek do not take into account any other factors when it come to supplying water to its citizens except the factor that “water is business just like other business”.Are the poor tragically falling on their own defensive spears? The Municipality of Windhoek is headed by the representatives of the people who were directly elected into their positions by the people of Namibia.These municipal officials are supposed to be the socio-economic spears of the people and demolish poverty on their behalf instead of nailing them to the cross of destitution and desperation.Namwater is a public enterprise that, on behalf of the government, is supposed to ensure that all the citizens of this country are watered, not with hopelessness, but with that crystal blue liquid.But instead of doing so, both Namwater and the Municipality of Windhoek are trying to make a lucrative business out of this public commodity.Their argument that all people, irrespective of the financial abilities of individual citizens being taken into consideration, must fully pay for their water to ensure that they can recover all the costs involved in supplying this water is the most irrational argument I ever picked up from the mouth of seemingly rationally educated people.During this workshop none of the participants even bothered to ask a question like, Are the exorbitant salaries and allowances of the employees of Namwater and Municipality not the substantial component of the costs of supplying the water that Namwater and Municipality try to impose on the poor citizens through their pathetic full recovery approach?Another question that one may be tempted to ask is: what is the central government’s position on this issue?If the government can tolerate the Full Cost Recovery strategies of Namwater and Municipalities, it then must take on a legal obligation of subsidizing the water and electricity supply of the poor and destitute citizens.There are those who claim that it is difficult to identify the poor.Is this really so or are we trying to simply say that we, and our “sound economic principles” approach, can do without the poor?After all, I have never come across an economic theory, even those from the most talked about Free Market System, which advocates the exclusivity of the poor in its application.This is because the fundamental underpinning of any economic theory is the sustainablity of its application.This simply shows us that the unconditional full cost recovery strategies of water payment being applied by Namwater and the municipality are subversively contradicting economic principles and are therefore economically unjustifiable.Article 45 of our “democratic bible”, i.e. the constitution of the Republic of Namibia, states that “The members of National assembly shall be the representatives of all the people and shall in the performance of their duties be guided by the objectives of this constitution, by the public interest and by the their conscience”.Are the members of parliament, constitutionally mandated to be in full control of the government, really doing their work if some of the people they represent get denied access to water simply because they are poor?Is their silence and ignorance of these crucial issues an indication of people being guided by public interest and by their conscience?It is quite sad that the socio-economic victims in the present day Namibia, under a government of black Namibians, are, ironically, the very same people who were the greatly affected victims of the former apartheid regime, the ordinary black Namibians.David Uuyuni Wa Kamati Hakahana – Katutura Windhoek