THE HILL GETS WET
How parties stack up on protecting water
Since the Harper government
first announced its “national
water strategy” – largely a
patchwork of funding proposals
– in its October 2007
Throne Speech, it has done
little to protect Canada’s water.
The Harper government promised a
clean water strategy in March 2007.
Yet a year later, a Canadian Medical
Association Journal (CMAJ) report
revealed there were 1,766 boil-water
advisories in effect across the country.
A strategy for safe drinking water
in First Nations communities was
launched in March 2006, yet according
to the CMAJ report, a staggering 93
advisories were in place in First Nations
communities as of February 29, 2008.
While the government claims to be
committed to the issue of safe drinking
water, it has put public money destined
for water infrastructure into the hands
of water privateers.
Municipalities were once again denied
much-needed funding for crumbling
infrastructure in the Harper government’s
2008 budget. Instead, the
government announced a new Crown
corporation to build private-public partnerships
called PPP Canada Inc. The
Crown corporation lists several multinational
corporations in its membership
list, including American Water Services
Canada – a corporation charged in
2005 by the Ontario Court of Justice
with contaminating Grindstone Creek
after allowing sewage to discharge into
the waterway.
The Harper government has also
ignored repeated calls from the Canadian public to ban bulk water
exports. In April 2007, the Council of
Canadians obtained a leaked document
produced by a Washington think tank,
revealing that business and government
leaders in Canada, the U.S. and
Mexico were actively discussing bulk
water exports within the context of the
Security and Prosperity Partnership of
North America (SPP). The government
continues to falsely assert that existing
legislation will protect water from
being exported and denies that the
SPP puts Canada’s water at risk despite
growing evidence to the contrary. The
Conservative Party also voted against a
motion to have water removed from the
North American Free Trade Agreement
– a motion that was endorsed by all
other opposition parties.
In addition, the government refuses to
recognize water as a human right, and
played a key role in watering down a
motion by Germany and Spain to officially
recognize water as a human right
at the last UN Human Rights Council
meeting in March 2008.
Opposition parties, on the other hand,
have fared much better when it comes
to water issues. Here is a look at the
legislation and policies proposed by the
other parties:
New Democratic Party
Peggy Nash, NDP Public Works
and Government Services critic and
Deputy Critic for Infrastructure and
Communities, is awaiting second reading
on a groundbreaking motion that
calls for a “comprehensive water policy
based on public trust,” which would
recognize access to water as a fundamental
right, ban bulk water exports
and restrict diversions. It would also
establish national standards for safe,
clean drinking water and prevent private-
public partnerships by ensuring
funding for public infrastructure in
municipalities and Aboriginal communities.
Internationally, the motion
would see Canada oppose measures that
promote water privatization and ensure
that water does not become a commodity
in current and future trade deals.
The motion proposed by the NDP
reflects similar demands put forward by
the Council of Canadians in our call for
a national water policy. In recognizing
water as a public trust and a human
right, it addresses both domestic and
international strategies.
Liberal Party
Liberal Water Critic Francis
Scarpaleggia has tabled a private member’s
bill in the House of Commons
called the Canada Water Preservation
Act. If adopted, the bill would prohibit
large-scale displacements of fresh
water outside major drainage basins.
Scarpaleggia claims this would translate
into an effective ban on bulk
water exports to the United States, or
anywhere else in the world. He argues
that this would save us from having to
reopen NAFTA by taking an ecosystems
approach to waterways that would prevent
transfers along ecological, rather
than political boundaries.
Scarpaleggia has also submitted a
motion to the House of Commons
Environment Committee asking it
to undertake a study of the effects of
Alberta’s oil sands development on
water. The motion was adopted by the
committee at a meeting in January, and the committee began the in-depth
study in June.
The Liberal Party is also looking at
creating a water minister position to
work with the provinces on federal
water legislation.
Scarpaleggia’s proposals would be a step
forward in eliminating interbasin transfers
and addressing water use concerns
in the tar sands. However, they do not
go far enough. The Liberal Party does
not address the impacts of water privatization
on Canada’s drinking water and
continues to oppose the right to water
on the false assumption that endorsing
it would leave Canada’s water open to
bulk exports.
However, Scarpaleggia contends that a
water minister under July 17, 2008date to
determine how to recognize water as an international human right in a way that
safeguards Canadians’ ownership of
this resource.
Bloc Québécois
The Bloc Québécois has long called
for a federal water policy resembling
the one adopted by Quebec in 2002.
The Quebec water policy has many
positive elements, but does not prevent
private sector involvement in municipal
water services, and fails to recognize
water as a human right.
Last spring, the Bloc Québécois
introduced a motion to the Standing
Committee on International Trade
that recommended the government
quickly begin talks with its American
and Mexican counterparts to exclude
water from the scope of NAFTA.
The motion passed in June 2007 with
support from all of the parties except
the Conservatives.
Unfortunately, to date the Conservative
government has not begun talks to
exclude water from NAFTA.
Canadians have waited far too long
for a national water policy. With growing
water shortages, increasing water
contamination and the looming threat
of bulk water exports, the Canadian
public is anxious to see a strategy to
protect Canada’s water. An April 2008
survey conducted by Environics for the
Council of Canadians demonstrates
that 89 per cent of Canadians want a
national water policy that would ban
bulk water exports and recognize water
as a human right.
It is time for our government to honour
this demand.
Meera Karunananthan is the National Water
Campaigner for the Council of Canadians.
Printer-friendly version:The Hill Gets Wet in PDF Format (81kB)
