Water, more on SEWA , and the long from census

Water. . .

I wrote a little about international access to water, yesterday; and this morning, there it is, in the news. . . Funny how these things hang around in the ether. . .

The story was in the The Toronto Star this morning and the head was: UN to vote on right to water: ‘Historic’ chance to ease human suffering, says Canadian activist

The "activist" in question is Maude Barlow - the founder of the Council of Canadians. The article says in part:

A United Nations vote to recognize water as a basic human right is a “historic” chance for the global community to ease human suffering, according to a Canadian activist in the thick of a last-ditch lobbying effort.

“We’re running out of water and the crisis is getting worse,” Maude Barlow said Monday from New York, on the eve of a vote expected as early as Wednesday at the UN General Assembly.

“If we don’t make a statement that we don’t want entire populations left behind, what does it say about us? About our humanity?”

Barlow, former senior adviser on water at the UN and chair of the Council of Canadians citizens group, is optimistic the resolution will pass by majority vote.

However, it appears powerful nations — including Canada — either will not support it or will push for a version that Barlow says would continue to allow water to be bought and sold as a commodity.

Of course Canada, emphasizing free market policies and lauding corporations over the needs of people, that our government has become, would not want to say that water is not a commodity and cannot be bought and sold - they would privatize the air I think, if they could. I want to re-write the headlines - Canada votes to deny water to the poor, shareholders of water corporations are gonna' party like its 1999.

When did "shareholder's interests" become more important than citizen interests? At least once we pretended that this was not the case and so if you caught a government out, voting for corporate interests, over the public, you could point it out and changes might happen. Now it is like everyone is a Reagan Clone -- everyone buys trickle down or class mobility- trickle down in that (even though it has proven over and over again that it only leads to greater disparities between rich and poor) when corporations do well - they employ more people etc and so everyone benefits - the rising tide lifts all boats theory. . . and then there is class mobility and people believe that they can be lifted beyond the next level to the top - this is people who vote and support what is good for the rich because they believe that they will "be there someday".

Anyway, shouldn't water and food and shelter be accessible to everyone? It is not. We should agree that we are going distribute the wealth of this world in a way that means that everyone has the basics covered. We will have to do with less, as others need more. Yes where there is drought or famine for some other reason (often war) we need to get water and food to people - this is much easier if no one owns the water. Then international support can help drill for the water, put in a well or pipes to move it around. When water is privatized, the water corp. has to make sure that a profit is made, which increases the price on every well dug, every pipe laid. . . So why is Canada not agreeing to declare that water is a human right - more from the Star article:

Foreign Affairs spokesperson said in an email Tuesday that Canada already “recognizes there are linkages between access to safe drinking water and certain existing human rights obligations,” and supports further study on the issue of water as a right.

The email also said Canada asserts “its international human rights obligations in no way limit its sovereign right to manage its own resources.”

Barlow dismisses the argument that Canada’s water resources could be jeopardized by the proposed UN resolution. She says the sweeping 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights doesn’t mean Canada has to guarantee jobs or pensions for every country.

. . .

Time is critical, says Barlow, because the world is facing “a double whammy”: continued lack of water through poverty and the growing physical and ecological crisis that deprives the world of clean water.

___________________________________________________________________

After mentioning SEWA yesterday I wanted to follow up with more information about why I love them and think they are a great model. I would love to know more about them.

SEWA is the "Self-employed women's association" of India - of course the poor in India, as elsewhere, are for the most part not employed. By that I do not mean that they are "unemployed" but that they are small resellers of goods, subsistence farmers, makers of crafts, drivers of taxi's - that is they are self-employed. Some estimates are, that 80% of the world population are "not employees". So SEWA has been a very successful model in assisting women in India that are in this category - they say on their website:

SEWA is a trade union registered in 1972. It is an organisation of poor, self-employed women workers. These are women who earn a living through their own labour or small businesses. They do not obtain regular salaried employment with welfare benefits like workers in the organised sector. They are the unprotected labour force of our country. Constituting 93% of the labour force, these are workers of the unorganised sector. Of the female labour force in India, more than 94% are in the unorganised sector. However their work is not counted and hence remains invisible.

One story I heard some time ago - but it may be somewhere on their website [later: found the detail at: http://www.sewa.org/Rudi Products And Rudi Multi Trading Co Ltd.asp] or I may have read it elsewhere is about one of the things that SEWA does -- is that many women are subsistence farmers. When food is harvested, sometimes they have surplus that cannot be eaten or stored. However, let's say on any given day you have 10 tomatoes - 10 tomatoes will get you say 50 rupees at the market, but the bus ride to and from the market is 30-50 rupees - so it is not worth going - you cannot earn cash from your surplus as it too small an amount - so SEWA
runs a truck that drives through these remote places and buys the surplus at the same rate the women would get if they could get to the market - providing cash income. I don't know why that seems like such a simple.good idea but I really thought it was terrific as the subsistence farmers in India do not do well, although it represents so much of the country.

___________________________________________________________________

Cannot believe that the Cons are still holding out on the Long Form census - from the perspective of most "ordinary " folks - this looks like a big mistake - apparently, it is just pandering to the Con "base" who are to the right of Atilla the Hun! Those same folks who want shareholder rights to be paramount, who want more actions made crimes, who want to lock more people up for longer, who want to give the police more powers, privatize our jails etc. But, eliminating the census also insures that there will never be reliable, acceptable data to prove that we have poor people, aboriginal people, people who speak other languages at home, people who have health problems - among other groups with needs. . . what a travesty . . . Most recent CBC update at: Clement, Sheikh to testify about census reform