And if the buyers stock portfolio should happen to contain shares in the local bottled water plant, they would never ever contrive situations leading to dirty water coming out of the faucets.

And there would be extreme vigilance regarding any under-the-table shenanigans. Yeah, right.

Again, the fallacy of privitisation, sell the waterworks, you sell your soul. These right wing 'privitise everything' zealots, will be the death of us all!

Privatization of services is the biggest subsidy to special interest sectors, but nobody ever dares to mention it. Especially economists, who always complain about "subsidies" when the beneficiaries are communities.

Ask the Fraser Inst. !

Ed Deak, Big Lake.

Have the powers that be forgotten (or do they even know of) the role privatization played in Walkerton?

Tell us, mbraun: what role did privatization play in the killing of water-drinkers in Walkerton, Ontario, just outside Windsor.

Okay, all I ask is how many of you anti-privatization types out there drink Donsansh or Perrier water that is delivered to you solely by private hands.
Has anyone ever got sick drinking their water ?

Putting on my devil's advocate hat: Couldn't you say the same thing about food? Or a place to live?

BC Mary: what happened was the ontario gov't, in an attempt to cut costs, contracted the testing of water to a private lab. I realize that the water system itself remained a public utility, but testing the safety of the water supply is part of the system. Although regulation was weak to begin with, it was further jeopardized because scrutiny of private companies was nearly non-existent - this was done in order to cut red tape and reduce the "burden" of gov't regulation on private firms. Certainly, the private lab was not solely to blame for this, but if testing the water supply remained part of the public sector, the regulations and procedures would have been in place, but since it was a private firm, they were not.

RE: another incredibly flawed theoretical link. The standards those companies adhere to are a function of their profit. That is, if they sell dodgy water, who will buy it? The public water supply should not be subjected by market principles - even you must be able to understand that, but perhaps I give you too much credit!

Goweropolis: in fact, i believe that you can say the same about food and shelter - they are fundamental rights of every human being. I could be wrong, but isn't that in some UN Charter?

mbraun: thanks for the reminder of which part of the Walkerton tragedy fell into private hands.

What I don't understand is your nasty comment toward me personally ... what the heck brought that on?

You threw out an oblique comment. I pick up the question, as it seems to relate to the topic under discussion. And you insult me?

You either get it or you don't. Selling our public water supplies would be a stunningly stupid idea, period.

Any politician who even imagines selling off our water supplies will lose my vote forever.

mbraun' yes you are correct, profit will drive safety issues. I mean where is the accountability of Public Sector Union employees ?
All private entities are driven to quality by their need to profit. It's a perfect system to be embraced by all.

BC Mary: I sincerely apologize if there was any tone of insult in my post. I'm not sure which comment you're referring to. If you're talking about my second paragraph, that was directed toward our friend mr. erwin.

Privatise public infrastructure in haste; repent at leisure.....

I do remember the Perrier that was contaminated with benzene Ron Erwin.

Probably a leftist plot.

Because .... ?

C'mon Ed -- I'm sympathetic to your position, but I need to know reasons to accept an argument. An appeal to faith only preaches to the converted.

I'd like to know the details of the contract before condemning private ownership of water purification systems: how often they must test for quality; how often they must report to the government and to whom they must report, etc.

For example, White Rock has a very high quality water supply system, drawn from artesian wells, which has been privately owned for decades. From what I understand, many of the locals are proud of their higher-quality private water and look down their nose on Surrey/GVRD water. Is this wrong? (Mind you, I don't know the details of their responsibility to the public as a utility)

Well, OK, mbraun ... I thought RE: meant Re:

Ron,

Give me a break. The article is clearly about municipal water supply. Do you wash your car with Perrier? Unlikely, I'd wager, so you're really comparing apples and oranges.

jimmy' I know it's about the municipal water supply. What I am trying to say by my reference to bottled water is that these private companies that produce and market bottled water are driven to safety by their need to profit.
In otherwords, Public Sector Union employees are not nearly as accountable as private sector workers.
So I don't see a problem here.

I thought water quality sampling was already contracted out to private labs across BC. I only know of a handful of labs that can handle water sampling and none are owned by any level of government. I seem to recall a bidding process for the sampling in Campbell River a few months back. I would say the Tyee is a little behind the times, this is not a new thing. Also, these private sampling companies would have to adhere to the same laws and regulations as any other level of government performing the sampling. We have come a long way since Wakerton but the road is long and bumpy and lets face it the BC gov't has done a crappy job anyways. I do not mind if sampling is in private hands I do have a problem with private companies running water systems. Check out British Columbia Water and Waste Water Society for some good info as to what is going on in BC. Who is out there checking the quality of our lakes? This article is only looking at the small picture. if the Tyee wants fiesty then give us more to chew on.

Ron Erwinposted: 29 Minutes Ago
jimmy' I know it's about the municipal water supply. What I am trying to say by my reference to bottled water is that these private companies that produce and market bottled water are driven to safety by their need to profit.
In otherwords, Public Sector Union employees are not nearly as accountable as private sector workers.
So I don't see a problem here.

The assumption is that the two are inextricably tied (profit and safety). Why would companies go to great lengths to circumvent existing regulations to their industry in the name of profit?

to Ron Erwin

I have been employed in the private sector for over 40 years (Pulp and Paper industry). I know from direct experience that safety and quality take a distant back seat to profit. Private sector companies are accountable to their shareholders only. If the profits are great enough they will do what ever it takes to achive the profit for the shareholders. I have seen effluent and other wastes dumped, violating permits and the fines swallowed because it would have cost more to fix the problem. If you think a private company is going to worry more about the health and safety of its product than about how much profit it can make then you are blind to the reality of private business.

Which planet have you just come from, Daniel?

ron you really are a moron why don't you go drink some water in the congo or move back to the states where you belong.

I have worked in most of the Pulp Mills in this Province and yes you are right they are major polluters try to avoid them prefer even Syncrude to a dirty old Pulp Mill.

Walkerton, anyone???

I think any attempt by this government or any other for that matter is a deplorable abuse of public trust. Having said that I wonder how many know that 100 mile has had private water works from its beginnings, and owned by a Cult no less. The emmisaries own it all lock stock and barrel

Tom, the Emmisaries(of Devine Light - I believe), once owned just about everything in 100 Mile House, didn't they.

I would toss that ownership in with the usual mixture you might find in a one-company town where the employer puts in the infrastructure.

Campbell River is a bit larger than that and has the expertise to run its own affairs using its own tax base.

What has me wondering though, is how has the mid-level manager who signed the privatization contract managed not to have red flags popping off above his head when he was cutting that deal.

Perhaps the mayor might send a cautionary memo off to staff urging reviews of contract proposals by people with at least an appreciation of the political ramifications of certain acts before the city has been parcelled out from underneath everyone.

I've never bought bottled water, and refuse to be suckered.

The majority would not know if they were drinking water bottled directly from the faucet
or after passing through a $5 Brita, or somesuch, filter - if that.

What was it that W.C. Fields had to say about something or other being born every minute?

ursus' Good morning and how are you today ?

Private vs Public ownership of water systems.

It occurs to me that hiring (and if necessary, terminating) a private lab. to do water testing for a publicly-owned not-for-profit water system is one thing. Such a contract would be subject to terms, conditions, oversight, and an escape clause.

A far, far different and more dangerous thing is having the whole water system in private, for-profit ownership where the public has no right of access to either the records, or how they are kept, or anything else.

mbraun, you are completely misguided in your assessment of what happened in Walkerton. Basically all testing of water is done in privately-owned labs (it is a specialized field and far too expensive for each municipality to have the resources to do on their own).

In Walkerton, the private lab warned the public employees of a problem, which was ignored.

The following is a link to the Walkerton enquiry report.

http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/walkerton/part1/

writerdave, i've read the report too, but you missed my point. I was basically pointing to the fact that privatized firms are not subjected to the same regulation as public service departments. I'm not blaming the private lab at all (I actually believe that they did all they could). I put some of the ont. gov't for two related things: one was privatizing water testing, and two, its principles of reducing red tape and reguations for private businesses. That deadly mix put the public interest in jeopardy - that's were i find some serious problems.

Living on a ranch we have our own well and water supply. But what people have to realize is that when certain regional bodies sell water systems to corporations, they also sell All WATERS. Including underground aquifers and rainwater collectins sytems, ofrcing people to pay for the water from their own wells.

This has happened in may parts of the world, like in Africa and South America, resulting in loss of services and safety, huge charges to the population, cholera epidemics and in the case of Bolivia in revolution and deaths. Now the Bechtel corporation who were kicked out of the country, are suing for loss of indefinite profits.

Plus, if anybody dares to question the actions of the privatizers, regardless of facts, they're being sued for defamation. This has already happened here in Williams Lake over privatized old people's home care.

Ed Deak, Big Lake.

There are some things relating to public safety and public resources that are certainly open to debate with respect to private participation.

City water should not be one of those.

Ron E's arguments (I feel) would be better suited to arguments about offshore oil and gas.

Boy-oh-Boy, Ed, The times they sure are a-changin' eh? But Dylan never foresaw these.

It's weird how the times today prompt my memories of the old 60's protest songs.

"The law is fer perteckshun of the peepul" Yup, Christofferson hit that nail on the head.

I could quote an old Hungarian folk song that says: "Poplar trees don't grow to the heaven..."

What goes up must come down, there are no straight lines in the unverse and one of these days people will have enough and put a stop to this crime wave in the name of economics.

Regardless of the memorized slogans, that some wind up puppets write on these blogs, cheering on these crooks.

Ed Deak.

In my small town, with water that exceeds by far any safety standards, we see dickheads proudly brandishing the trendy plastic water bottles, paying per liter more than the price of gasoline, and blissfully unaware of the reports which show various contaminations, besides the fact that some of these come from tested municipal sources, so thus are legally sold as "pure".

Hey Ron,to say that profit guarantees quality or safety of a product is the most absurd statement you've come up with.Bopal India,Ford Pinto,silicon breast implants,Enron,Walmart,to name but a few examples.Only my ignorance limits what must be thousands of other examples.

scylla,

Easy now! Please leave those "dickheads" alone.
I'm clearing at least 50 cents a day from those bottles they toss.

its simple,if we ve paid for it,there is no need to sell it

My apologies to Daniel, who was obviously being satirical. I missed that he was quoting His Lordship.

I guess I thought even he couldn't be that stupid, but I'm reminded once again that he is.

To add some balance to this story, in Campbell River, city council still has final approval before anything in the water system is contracted out. That's fully in the public eye.

I live in a Seniors facility where many residents insist on bottled water. So they have these big jugs placed on dispeners so you can fill a bottle to drink in your room. I have always used tap water, as I am familiar with the local supply and know there is nothing wrong with it. Last March I was in hospital for two weeks and was surprised to learn that the hospital uses tap water. When I returned here I asked management why they used bottled water for drinking? The reply was "don't tell anyone, but those jugs are filled from the taps"

I am quite sure much of the bottled water for sale also comes from municipal taps. Some companies have admitted as much. Quite a profitable business selling tap water for whatever they charge!

stinkysalmon wrote:

In some parts of BC drinking water is tested by private labs, but the majority of it is done at the BC Center for Disease Control, which is owned by the provincial government.

http://bccdc.org/division.php?item=2

It seems to me one of the questions that we should be asking is what will happen when Terasen owns the gas and the water? Seeing as the Americans still believe in Manifest Destiny why on earth are we handing over these resources to American concerns?

I am not one of the people who chooses to pay lots of money for bottled water and I don't want to end up paying the same prices for municipal water which is not all that far-fetched!!