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

Naxalites, Maoists, India

Due to an article in Tehelka, an Indian investigative journalism magazine, I am thinking again about "the Maoists" or "Naxalites" in India.

In the interior of India there are people called the Adivasi or "tribal" people - these are people that are thought of much like we think of our indigenous people in Canada - those people "over there" - not Hindi, Muslim, Christian or Buddhist - they are outsiders and because they traditionally held their land in common they are not -"owners of the land". As a result the government sees the land (or at least has too often treated it that way) as unoccupied or at least unowned and gives mineral, mining and damning rights to multi-national corporations which flood or destroy the land of the Adivsai. Since the 1940's the Maoists have been the only ones helping and defending the Adivasi people. So as Roy (see next para) put it, 90% of the Maoists are Adivasi but not all the Adivasi are Maoists.

A while ago, I was quite compelled by Arundhuti Roy's article in Outlook that defended the Maoists and their violence, see here, because they are defending those without rights or privilege in India and the movement is growing especially among the "tribal people". Several articles have been published lately that were very sympathetic to the Maoists or Naxalites as they are known in India.

Their previous violence has targeted police, military, paramilitary and corporations. There has been some (but little) collateral damage - killed civilians (and always because they were unluckily traveling on the same bus or train as lots of military or police.) Now, suddenly a few weeks ago, a civilian train travelling from Kolkata to Delhi is blown up, or the track was sabotaged, it seems to be still a little unclear - but it was clear that two months ago, a bus load of police and security police wanna-be's was attacked and there were "civilian casualties" - although the bulk of deaths were police - and everyone is blaming the Maoists who have apparently only slaughtered (relatively) innocent civilians - what's the dealio?

Another article in Outlook here.
and here, questioning whether it was in fact, the Maoists.
Another story here from Al Jazeera
And lastly in the Guardian - UK supporting the struggle for the landless even if not the Naxalite methods. . .

But they have not got control over all of the forces that are calling themselves "Maoists." In this article from Tehelka they suggest that the Naxals and the Green Hunt (paramilitary force set up by the government to hunt Naxals - Judum ) are both torturing and killing people, including raping women, and executing people for being anti-naxal informers, or for supporting "the other side" . . . This sounds reminiscent of stories from Vietnam - but most people just want to return to their villages and improve their lives. . .. As the Tehelka article puts it:

It has been five years since the Judum was formed, but there is no rehabilitation policy for displaced villagers. TEHELKA visited four ‘relief’ camps and found that almost 100 percent of the Adivasis want to return to their villages. Manni Paro pays a Judum leader Rs 200 a month to keep her mud hut and tarpaulin sheets. Those who cannot afford the bribe moved further into the more cramped sections of the camp.

“We were much happier in our villages. The Naxals didn’t bother us before the Judum started. We got fish from the lakes and reared our chicken. Everything was cheap,” says Madkam Sita, from Konta camp. “Here, there is nothing to do and not enough to feed my three children.”

In what is perhaps an attempt to corroborate the government’s claim that it is giving the Judum no official support, the supply of free ration to the camps was stopped three months ago. Korsa Sanmu, Sarpanch of Silger and Judum leader, met the CM for answers. “We can’t feed you forever. You have to stand on your own feet. The supplies had to end at some point,” he says the CM told him.

The desperation has triggered a new trend. Most Dornapal camp villagers now trek upto 20 km to cultivate their fields, always fearfully. Some have received notices from the Naxals: “Come back home. We will not harm you.” But the past records are ugly, and there is a trust deficit in Dantewada.

For those whose homes are deeper in the jungle, even such daily trips are impossible. Mangal Dai from Aserguda village now toils under the NREGS, but yearns for his five-acre plot. “If I go back, the Naxals will kill me for being part of the Judum, and the Judum will kill me for helping the Naxals,” he says. “We’re being hounded at both ends.”

More trouble for women - I do hope that things improve. . .