Nevertheless, what politician today would dare to admit to a mistake with such repercussions? And respect to the ones who also learn from it!  

As the Berliner delegates decided about the Partial Privatization of the Water Utilities, although "fully briefed", they did not know, beyond the contracts before them, what they were actually voting for:  the private, and therefore secret consortium agreement. In it, all the important guidelines of the new partially private BWB are specified:

• Who the official management is.
• Division of the profits - a guarantee of profit for the private shareholders
• Possibility of further privatization a.o.

With their best intentions, the Berliner delegates could not have known about all of this.

When a portion of the profit guarantee became known, and the opposition successfully went against it before the constitutional court, even more of the consortiums regulations were brought to light

• The Berliner Senate is under any circumstances liable to pay compensation, to private parties for loss of profit!
• This means, the private consortium contract waves not only the delegate's freedom of choice but also the decision of the Constitutional Court!  After the decision, only the method of payment was changed: Any deficits in the payment of the guaranteed profit would be refunded by the Senate!    

This model is being perfected in the rapidly spreading public-private partnerships. Starting in Offenbach.

Here, Hochtief has been renovating and operating 49 schools for 15 years.  The company estimates that it costs 100-130€ from their own means. In the beginning Hochtief receives very little, but this amount increases over the years, and on top receives an additional 410 million € from the City of Offenbach!

Our experience with the water industry in England, that has been corporate for 17 years, has been frustrating on many different levels. This was not only due to the drinking water supply suffering under the pressure to yield profit (a lack of sanitization of the lines and canalization infrastructure, fragile pipes, failing water pressure, modest water quality, high prices) but amazingly, the large majority of the population does not see this as a problem you could do something about. In particular the institution of the highest water modulator OFWAT gives the impression that far and wide, a seemingly all-powerful one is already doing his best.  Indeed the regulators of the private water companies are allowed to decide to what extent they can raise prices.  However, they do not get around negotiating with Thames Water & Co. regarding what price increase to approve for which investment of urgent necessity. They have no right to independently examine the documents, as they are private. So it is something of a sport for the water companies to on paper, estimate the investment costs high, but in reality save as much as possible on what is actually being done.

Along with rising prices, investment cutbacks, unemployment, the quality of the water itself has decreased.  It is not only wasted, but high levels of it are being consciously contaminated.  Thames Water & Co. is the number one polluter of water in England.  50 to 60 times a year, Thames Water allows untreated sewage to flow into the river.  It is cheaper than modernizing the facilities.  One of the results of the high level of sewage in the river is  “Feminized Male Fish”.  Scientist of the Environmental Agency has discovered that in the male reproductive chambers, female ova have developed. Responsible for this, among other things, is the presence of poisons found within human wastewater, such as hormones psychopharmacology or paramagnetic agents. The current method for processing the drinking water cannot filter out these poisons – this would perhaps only be possible through micro filtering but this is extremely expensive.

Certainly nothing for profit oriented private companies. But what about the consequences this has on the human reproduction ability? 


Locally owned water utilities – Is this the Answer? 

Without a doubt – a local ownership of the water utilities offers the possibility of a broader democratic control than that of an international cooperation, which is not as concerned with local needs but more with the net yield. 

MVV, who took over TXU’s shares of the Kieler Public Utilities after their insolvency, is still recognized by many as a local enterprise.  In actuality they are the Mannheimer Transport enterprise, and to a large degree still owned by the city of Mannheim. However, for a long time the expansion over the local boarders has turned MVV into a cooperation that holds its own on the European market along with REW and Eon to name a few, and have to act under the same laws of operation as the “Multis”. The local activity then merely serves as a cover and a good source of income for the city of Mannheim.

In times of low funds, practically every German city is interested in creating as high a revenue/surplus as possible from their Water- and City utilities, thus the difference between local and private ownership is easily washed out. For municipalities, who would only squint at the profit from their utilities, routine pipeline cleaning becomes a cost easily questioned.  

Across the globe trade unions are recognized as opponents to privatization of the water utilities.  Kiel is no exception, here 95% of the City utility employees have been organized for a long time and have extensive strike experience. Nevertheless, 51% of their enterprise was sold to the Texan TXU with practically no resistance.  How could this happen?

Initially the work council had been prepared for a strong resistance.

The local trade union leaders missed clear orientation and support for resistance measures.  This unclear attitude was surely due to one of the dilemmas German trade unions have, that strikes outside of tariff negotiations are forbidden. There is also very little practical experience in resistance against political-social developments like the increasing privatization of public properties.

When left to itself, the work council faltered and were susceptible to “if you do not agree, then you are responsible for the layoffs when the utilities are unable to compete on their own!” type of oppression.  The offer from TXU, to make Kiel the base for the German wide expansion of their cooperation, along with a promise to refrain from any layoffs over several years, seemed very appealing. Even the most critical of the work council drew new hope that there would be a secure future along side of the “strong strategic partner”.

The complaints were all the louder when only after a few short months; the strong strategic partner showed its true face. 

The Kieler employees are not alone when it comes to realizing a problem first when it is too late.  Looking at the German capitol city of Berlin, the picture is very much the same.  There the work council and the trade union had a clear position against the partial privatization of the BWB and along with large demonstrations, showed that they were ready to fight.  This did not stop the employment department from, only hours later, falling for practically the same form of oppression as in Kiel, with the same bait, promises that there would be no operation based layoffs, and agreeing to the privatization deal.  In the mean time, Berlin is now aware that employee reduction, with or without operation related conditions, can occur without notice.

It is possible to do it completely differently! This was shown by NRW, where Münster managed to defend itself against privatization, with strong support from the VERDI union.  Other communities, like Bad Salz Ufflen had similar successes.