David Morgan: Recognizing the human right to water – Does Canada even care?

Introduction

• This paper will argue that by opposing the recognition of water as an international human right, Canada is not only obstructing a rights-based approach to the provision of water in developing countries, it is preventing this approach within its own borders. While this recognition is not, by itself, a solution to the growing issue of water scarcity, it will place a legal and moral obligation on the government to improve the basic availability of safe drinking water for all Canadians

Context

• Looming ‘global water crisis’

• The strengths and limitations of privatization 

• The international movement to recognize “the right to safe and clean drinking water and sanitation as a human right”

Water as a human right? 

• What would this entail in practice? Will it make any difference? 

• Responsibilities / obligations of international human rights covenants

• Why does Canada oppose the movement to recognize water as a human right?

• Why should Canada support this movement?

Concerns regarding privatization

• Maintaining the right to sell – the right to water implies collective management, not privatization

• South African case study: water is constitutionally recognized as a basic human need, and is provided as such, yet the provision of water has been largely privatized 

• Human rights and neoliberalism can co-exist 

Concerns regarding national sovereignty

• The recognition of water as a human right could legally require Canada to export water to countries in need, primarily the US

• This could also limit Canadian efforts to privatize water, by entailing moral obligations to others (and possibly to Canadian citizens) 

• No legal precedent – by ratifying international covenants on human rights, states conform to international standards of behaviour. In practice, this has occurred primarily within the domestic sphere, and does not imply an obligation to other countries 

Concerns regarding constitutionality / financial burden 

• Water management in Canada is highly fragmented – with various responsibilities falling among municipalities, the provinces, and the federal government – therefore requiring significant reform and investment to conform to international standards on water

• In particular, there are no national standards on water quality that are currently enforced. The federal and provincial governments tend to ‘pass the buck’ 

• Has led to policy gaps and oversight – primarily in First Nations communities, where there has been a persistent failure to provide safe and adequate water, leading to serious health concerns 

• All Canadians deserve an equal right to safe and clean drinking water, regardless of the cost. Recognizing water as a human right would establish the legal and moral framework on which the government can proceed. 

Recommendations / Conclusions 

• The federal government should recognize – domestically and internationally – the human right to water

• A national standard / vision for water would provide the necessary framework for reform

• Canada should adopt a harmonized model similar to that of the European Union, where water management organizations operate at the local level but work within federal standards on water quality 

Comments

[shannon dooling]

Hey Dave,

Here's a link to the actual Resolution: http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/ga10967.doc.htm

but here's what Canada had to say in particular...not extremely informative but contextual anyway:

"The representative of Canada said his delegation had joined the consensus on the resolution that had created the mandate of the independent expert. The work of that mechanism was expected to further promote study of the issue of access to water and sanitation as a human right and, as such, the text was premature. The non-binding resolution appeared to determine that there was indeed a right without setting out its scope. Since there was no consensus on the matter it was premature to declare such a right in the absence of clear international agreement, he said, adding that he had abstained from the vote."

[Josh]

Hi Dave,

Here is a Canadian declaration at the UN re: their concern over extraterritorial water obligations under a future human right framework. From the Liberal era too which should provide you with some breadth beyond the Conservative platform, likely tells us its more then just a partisan-ideological issue:

See, the statement made by a Canadian representative at the UN Commission on Human Rights in 2003 disputing a “‘right’ to drinking water and sanitation owed between states” (Canada 2003: para. 49).

IN: CANADA. (2003) UN Commission on Human Rights Summary Record of the 56th Meeting (19 May 2003). UN Doc. E/CN. 4/2003/SR. 56.

[Forrest]

Hi Dave,

I just found this announcement from the Council of Canadians:

http://canadians.org/water/issues/markets/index.html

Not only does it mention Maude Barlow, but they seem to be suggesting Alberta is on a path to the privatization of water rights - interesting stuff.