The opposition “sees” water privatization through Thessaly

Backdoor for her privatization of water the government “opens up” with the creation of a private organization for water management in Thessaly appreciates a united opposition. This was the common recommendation in the positions of the parties of the democratic arc against the provisions promoted by the bill proposed by the Minister of the Environment Theodore Skylakakis in the Parliament and its voting is expected to be completed today.

It is indicative that yesterday an objection to the unconstitutionality of the provisions of the bill was filed by SYRIZA and also by the New Left, which was rejected with the government invoking its parliamentary majority.

As pointed out by the opposition, these regulations will probably be a “guide” for the privatization of water at a nationwide level. While at the same time they strengthen the action of private interests in Thessaly. An area that has not “recovered” from the ravages of Daniel.

The opposition

On behalf of SYRIZA, Mr Miltos Zambaras stressed that “you are creating an anonymous company, an SA that will operate fully with private criteria and will manage the waters of Thessaly and the anti-flooding projects, where you have very specific responsibilities, as the Government, because in recent years you have not done anything even to shield of Thessaly – with the specific results – neither in relation to the flood management plans, nor in relation to the drainage basin management plans. In fact, he referred to a decision of the Council of State which states that “the essentially transformation of a public enterprise into a private one, which operates with a view to profit, renders uncertain the continuity of the provision of affordable public utility services, especially of high quality, which does not is fully ensured by state supervision”.

Representing PASOK, Mr Manolis Christodoulakiscalled on the government “not to use climate change as either a candy, let alone an alibi, to hide their real intentions, which are made abundantly clear by this bill: that is to weaken the role of the State in critical issues of control and policy-making , especially with the prominent issue of the opening of the privatization of the water resources management of Thessaly”.

THE Diamanto Manolakou from the KKE noted that the bill “privatizes water at faster speeds, because the privatization, the partial privatization, has been started for many years with the contribution of all governments”. He pointed out that “EYDAP and EYDATH became anonymous companies and entered the stock market in 2000 and they had not protested, on the contrary they helped it. This is how water turns into a commodity, although it must be a social good, since man cannot be deprived of it.” He added that “however, you are advancing rapidly today with the help and strategic plan of the reconstruction of Thessaly by the Dutch company that took it over and that manages huge funds for the profit of its multinational clients.”

Also the Theopist Perkas representing the New Left stated that “what the Government reserved for long-suffering Thessaly was the establishment of a private organization with the ultimate goal of privatizing the water resources of Thessaly for a start, because from what it seems it can be the pilot to implement and in the rest of the country”.

Theodoros Skylakakis

Of interest was the response given to this criticism by the Minister of the Environment, Theodore Skylakakis. He initially claimed that privatization is not in the government’s intentions. Explaining at the same time that no … CEO would undertake the management of Thessaly’s water because it does not constitute a profitable field, so the state must be active. Clarifying that “this is being said by someone who has full confidence in market forces, when the conditions and the region are right”. A phrase that refers to the government’s vision for the future.

Thodoros Skylakakis said that “it was constantly heard that it is a privatization bill, when in reality if it does anything it is that it nationalizes the only part of private water management that existed in Thessaly”. He characterized the bill as a reform, explaining that “reform can mean privatization, it can also mean nationalization, if the private entities in the specific function are not efficient and there are reasons to believe that the state can be more efficient in these functions.”

In fact, he wondered “what would a CEO, a head of a large company, say if an executive came and told him that I have a genius idea and I want us to become managers of the waters of Thessaly?” Then the CEO would ask the executive the following: You’re not telling me, where are we going to get money from? He will answer him, from the farmers of Thessaly. Do you really think we will get money from the farmers of Thessaly?’ He continued by saying that “if there are floods, everyone will be after us, because we will blame the disasters as an inability to operate. Do you now seriously imagine that there is anyone who is interested in taking on this burden in this coming crisis and that this is a wonderful idea to make private money? Go find him, because there is none.”