Embassy magazine reports, “After years of opposition, the Harper government now says that Canada will recognize the human right to water. As United Nations member states gather in New York for a last-minute round of talks (for the Rio+20 Earth Summit), Environment Minister Peter Kent (says) that Canada is ‘now prepared to move forward to explicitly recognize the human right to safe drinking water’ (and will) remove its request for the (Rio+20) statement on the right to safe drinking water and sanitation to be deleted. …’By the time we get to Rio (on June 20-22), we will make it clear that Canada recognizes the right to safe drinking water and to basic sanitation,’ he said. …At the same time, (Kent) maintained that the right to water should not encompass ‘trans-boundary water issues or the export of water, or any mandatory allocation of international development assistance’. ‘Canada has, in previous years, expressed unease with the recognition of human right to water, because there hasn’t been adequate clarity on exactly what the scope and the content of this right might be,’ he said.”
“Catarina de Albuquerque, the UN special rapporteur for the right to water, publicly condemned Canada for its stance in a speech on world water day, March 22. In an email to Embassy, she wrote that she is hopeful Canada would recommit to water and sanitation as a human right. ‘Ensuring the human right to water and sanitation for all must be at the center of the commitment of the Rio +20 outcome document,’ she wrote.”
“Anil Naidoo, a representative for the Council of Canadians and project organizer for the Blue Planet Project, which advocates for the right to water, …said he welcomed Canada’s change in position, ‘but cautiously’. ‘If this government is indeed shifting its position, we would certainly welcome that. We think that that puts Canada finally in line with the international community and our legal obligations,’ he said. He said he still has reservations until the government provides a public confirmation. The current government has changed its mind before, he added, so he is awaiting an official commitment. ‘The test has to be about actions, not words,’ he said. …Mr. Naidoo said he is also concerned about terminology. By adding words like ‘safe’ and ‘basic’, the UN document could be weakened, he argued.”
“Some legal water experts said they understood the basis for Canada’s position. Gabriel Eckstein, director of the International Water Law Project, said he understands why Canada has been reluctant to agree to the right to water. ‘If there’s a right to water, that sounds like it’s a right to some quantity, maybe some quality, and that’s a pretty big burden on governments,’ he said. If the language was changed to make the human right about access to water, it would be a ‘middle ground’ and it would mean governments have to ensure that citizens can access clean water, but not necessarily ‘for free’ and not necessarily ‘at your tap, in your house,’ he said.”
The full Embassy magazine article can be read at http://www.embassymag.ca/page/view/water-05-30-2012.
More soon.
