On August 25, the latest twist in Sydney's contaminated water saga occurred with the announcement that most of Sydney's 4.5 million residents must once again boil all drinking water.
The alert, the second in a month, has focussed attention on the operations of the Sydney Water Corporation, and the privately operated Prospect water treatment plant, which filters most of Sydney's water.
Green Left Weekly's JENNIFER THOMPSON spoke to the state secretary of the Australian Services Union (NSW), ALISON PETERS, about how the for-profit imperative of the corporation and treatment plant company has contributed to the crisis.
The Sydney Water Board was corporatised by the NSW Coalition government in 1995. Since then, state governments have extracted large dividends from the utility — the Labor government took $250 million last financial year.
The Prospect water treatment plant is one four "out-sourced" plants and is operated under contract by Australian Water Services (AWS), which involves Lend Lease and the French-owned Lyonnaise des Eaux (see article on page 13).
The ASU is concerned that the corporatisation, particularly the downsizing and constant restructuring, has meant the current problem is more serious than it need have been and was not discovered as quickly as possible.
The first scare began on July 27, six days after the dangerous parasitic protozoa, Cryptosporidium and Giardia, were detected in the Prospect plant's distribution chamber and the Potts Hill reservoir downstream from the plant.
The Giardia can be treated with chlorination and infections treated with drugs. Only one species of Cryptosporidium, C. parvum, is dangerous to people, but it cannot be killed with chlorine and there is no medical treatment for infection. Tests have yet to establish whether C. parvum is the contaminating species.
Shortly after the first crisis started, said Peters, Sydney Water issued a statement saying it was going to institute more regular checking at the Prospect treatment plant. "They were only checking the water on a monthly basis; that stuff could have been in the system for a lot longer than they were saying."
By August 4, state urban affairs and planning minister Craig Knowles declared that the water was again safe to drink and the next day formed an inquiry headed by Peter McClellan QC to investigate the causes of the contamination and how it was dealt with. McClellan issued an interim report on August 19 after initial investigations that were complicated by further readings of the parasites on August 13.
The ASU is concerned at the media and politicians' focus on which heads will roll as a result of the crisis, rather than on the main question of whether Sydney Water's financial priority is compatible with public health objectives.
"Sydney Water should be as good as it can be in terms of delivering water, but we don't think that should be measured in dollars. The size of its dividend is not the indicator that it's going well. It should be about the quality of the water it provides, the effectiveness with which it is provided and the quality of the waste water discharge."
Peters maintains that Sydney Water has quite a good record, but is concerned about the future of important maintenance work. "Since corporatisation, it seems that a lot of the things people have been saying for years should happen are just not getting done.
"Things like the covering of Potts Hill reservoir, which is still open but is where most of the inner regions and inner western suburbs get their water, are not getting done. Mains aren't getting replaced and a lot of the city's sewers and water mains probably need replacing."
She is also concerned about the consequences of contracting out the operations of the Prospect treatment plant. "It's clear that AWS and Sydney Water are gearing up for a legal battle." This diverts attention, she said, from fixing the problem to a legal argument about contracts and damages. Already, Sydney Water is threatening legal action against McClellan's inquiry if the results are "unfair" to it.
"It's what's going to happen when you contract out significant functions of a public utility. When there are problems, they get taken through the courts, rather than getting resolved. That's not in the community's best interest", Peters said.