daniel chigunwe
Nick Mangwana
Government Up Close
On January 6, the Minister of Local Government and Public Works Daniel Garwe had an interactive session with the media in which he announced a game changing policy shift in Zimbabwe’s potable water supply system.
As part of that, he articulated a comprehensive initiative aimed at tackling ongoing challenges in municipal water service delivery that will change the urban dwellers’ quality of life in a stupendous way.
This strategy is predicated upon the Government’s acknowledgment of the difficulties and in many cases, failures local authorities face in effectively managing water resources.
In this piece, we are going to give an expansive overview of this policy thrust, noting the obvious misgivings some citizens may have as well as focus on the advantages of this strategy and the experiences of other jurisdictions.
Zimbabwe’s water crisis has been a longstanding issue, affecting almost every urban council in the country.
The Government’s proposed policy direction is to privatise water supply, including purification, distribution, and billing systems.
This has sparked intense debate, with some arguing that privatisation will only exacerbate the problem, while others believe it is a necessary step towards ending the water crisis.
The reality is that local authorities have consistently demonstrated their inability to manage water supply effectively.
Inefficiencies, under-investment and mismanagement have resulted in residents paying for services they do not receive. This is unacceptable and underscores the need for a new approach.
Part of the Government’s strategic approach includes harnessing private sector expertise and investment. The Government aims to bolster operational efficiencies within water supply systems.
This includes creating functional systems and institutions capable of addressing the complexities of urban water management.
The benefits of privatisation are numerous.
Private companies bring in much-needed investment, expertise, and efficiency.
They have a vested interest in providing reliable, high-quality services to customers, as their reputation and bottom line depend on it.
This is in stark contrast to local authorities, which often lack the resources, capacity, and incentives to deliver effective services.
Those opposed to this privatisation thrust are expressing apprehensions that the process could result in higher costs for consumers without any noticeable improvement in service quality.
They are foreboding that privatisation may worsen existing disparities in water access with people of means benefiting much than those who are economically disadvantaged.
There are also fears that marginalised communities could face increased fees or diminished access, as profit-oriented companies may prioritise areas with greater financial returns over under-serviced populations.
It is essential to acknowledge these concerns about privatisation, particularly regarding affordability and equity. To address these concerns, the Government will ensure that privatisation is accompanied by robust regulatory frameworks, safeguarding the rights of consumers and ensuring that services are accessible and affordable for all.
The Government remains resolute in its commitment to expediting the privatisation of the water supply, acknowledging the dire need to alleviate the suffering of the public.
However, it is equally emphatic that this process will be undertaken with the utmost transparency, accountability, and inclusivity.
As such, the Government reaffirms its dedication to engaging in comprehensive consultations with the public, stakeholders, and relevant experts to ensure concerns, needs, and aspirations of all parties are duly considered and integrated into the decision-making process.
This collaborative approach will not only foster trust and confidence but also guarantee that the eventual outcome is equitable, sustainable, and truly reflective of the nation’s collective interests.
In the event that prepaid meters are considered as part of the privatised water supply system, it is imperative that the infrastructure and supply system are designed to ensure the availability of functional fire hydrants.
This is a critical consideration; as prepaid meters should not compromise public safety.
The Government will guarantee that the water supply system prioritises both the needs of paying customers and the broader public interest, including the provision of adequate fire-fighting capabilities.
By doing so, the Government will also ensure that the privatised water supply system strikes a balance between financial sustainability and social responsibility.
Learning from the experience of others; a robust regulatory framework should prioritise consumer protection and prevent profiteering.
This framework can include the establishment of an independent regulatory body with the authority to set and enforce strict standards for water quality, safety, and accessibility.
The framework would also include provisions for transparent and affordable pricing, with mechanisms for regular review and adjustment.
Additionally, the framework would ensure that private operators are held accountable for maintaining and upgrading infrastructure, with penalties for non-compliance.
To protect vulnerable populations, the framework would also include measures such as subsidised rates for low-income households, protection from arbitrary disconnections for non-payment by those facing hardship, and accessible complaint resolution mechanisms.
By establishing a comprehensive and enforceable regulatory framework, Zimbabwe can ensure that privatisation of the water supply serves the public interest and promotes equitable access to this essential resource.
According to Section 77 of the Zimbabwean Constitution, every person has the right to safe, clean, and potable water. However, this right remains an unfulfilled promise for many Zimbabweans, as tap water is often scarce or unavailable.
The constitutional guarantee is rendered meaningless when people are forced to rely on alternative, often unreliable, sources of water.
The situation is exacerbated by the fact that those who can afford it are able to drill boreholes and install water storage tanks, while the less fortunate are left to wait for intermittent council water supplies or resort to using unprotected wells.
This disparity creates a stark inequality between the haves and have-nots, undermining the fundamental right to water enshrined in the Constitution.
The question then arises: is it better to pay less for water that is not guaranteed to be available, or to pay a slightly higher price for a reliable and consistent water supply?
The answer seems obvious. Rather than perpetuating a system that fails to deliver on the constitutional promise of access to clean water, Zimbabweans deserve a reliable and equitable water supply system that upholds their fundamental rights. Privatisation through Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) appears the only way to go.
Let us examine the experiences of other jurisdictions so we can learn from their mistakes and achievements.
In 1989, the UK government, led by then Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, privatised the country’s water supply industry.
The Water Act of 1989 transferred the ownership of water and sewage services from the public sector to private companies. Ten regional water authorities in England and Wales were sold to private investors, marking a significant shift in the provision of this essential public service. The privatisation of England’s water supply has had mixed results.
On the positive side, private investment has led to significant improvements in infrastructure, with billions of pounds spent on upgrading pipes, treatment plants, and other facilities.
This has resulted in better water quality, reduced leakage rates, and improved customer service. However, critics argue that privatisation has also led to higher water bills, increased profits for shareholders, and concerns about the lack of public accountability and transparency.
Despite these concerns, the privatised water industry in England has been subject to regulation by the Water Services Regulation Authority (Ofwat) and the Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI).
These bodies have helped to ensure that private water companies meet certain standards and requirements, including those related to water quality, customer service, and environmental protection.
Overall, while the privatisation of England’s water supply has been a contentious issue, it has also driven investment and improvements in the sector.
One more notable example of successful water supply privatisation is the city of Johannesburg, South Africa.
In 2001, the city entered into a public-private partnership (PPP) with the French company Suez to manage its water services.
The partnership, known as Johannesburg Water, has been credited with improving the efficiency and quality of water services in the city. Under the partnership, Johannesburg Water has invested heavily in upgrading the city’s water infrastructure, resulting in a significant reduction in water losses and improved access to clean water for residents.
The success of Johannesburg Water has been recognised internationally, and it has served as a model for other cities in Africa and beyond.
The partnership has also helped to improve the financial sustainability of the city’s water services, with Johannesburg Water generating sufficient revenue to cover its operating costs and invest in new infrastructure.
This has helped to reduce the city’s reliance on government subsidies and has made the water services more resilient to economic shocks. ‘Kugara nhaka huona dzavamwe’.
The success of Johannesburg Water demonstrates that well-managed public-private partnerships can deliver great outcomes for residents.
Similarly, the privatisation of waste management in Harare, Zimbabwe, is already showing promising results.
Geo Pomona, a private waste management company, has partnered with the City of Harare to provide efficient and reliable waste collection services.
The partnership is already promising cleaner streets, reduced waste accumulation, and improved public health outcomes. This example demonstrates that, with proper regulation and management, privatisation can be an effective way to deliver essential services to residents.
Let us conclude by saying, privatising Zimbabwe’s water supply is a necessary step towards ending the crisis.
Local authorities have demonstrated their inability to manage water supply effectively, and private companies can bring in much-needed investment, expertise, and efficiency.
With proper regulation and safeguards in place, privatisation can help ensure Zimbabweans have access to reliable, safe, and affordable water supply.
Nick Mangwana is the Permanent Secretary for Information, Publicity and Broadcasting Services.
daglous masveta
