Profiting from bottled water at public expense
Why charge so little for a public resource - at giveaway prices below the cost of recovery?

thestar.com
By Martin Regg Cohn
Aug. 27, 2016

In case you missed the news:

Local residents say there is considerable hostility toward the bottling plants. “The tribals and villagers of this region took a while to wise up to the cause of the water crisis,” said C. R. Neelakandan Namboodiri, who lives in the area and described himself as a leftist and freelance environmentalist. “But now even the womenfolk are mobilized, and are staging a peaceful protest at the gates of the Coca-Cola factory,” Mr. Namboodiri said.

If the preceding paragraph - taken verbatim from a 2003 New York Times story out of India - has a familiar ring to it, that’s because Third World history and geography are repeating themselves right here in Ontario. Right now.

The names may be different, but the plot lines are perennial and the themes universal: A multinational bottler tapping into the local water table under the noses of irate locals.

Instead of rural India, the setting is southwestern Ontario, in Aberfoyle, just outside Guelph. And the besieged bottler in our backyard is global behemoth Nestle, not Coke.

Both multinationals have had their share of controversy across India and the world. It was only a matter of time before quiescent Ontarians woke up to the absurdities and inequities of big bottlers pumping for profit at public expense.

A grassroots campaign to preserve the water table has been gathering steam across the province in recent months. Distilled to its essence, protesters and petitioners say Nestle is harvesting a public resource for a pittance - paying a scandalously low $3.71 for every million litres of water that is then resold for . . . well, you can do the math for all those half-litre bottles on store shelves.

Not that there’s anything intrinsically wrong with making money. But why charge so little for a public resource - at giveaway prices below the cost of recovery?

As The Canadian Press reported this week, Nestle holds permits allowing it to extract more than 20 million litres of water daily in Ontario. And as CP pointed out, Nestle isn’t the only bottler burrowing into our water table at the same sweet price.

Still, it’s a bit too easy to berate big multinationals. The question is better put to our own government closer to home:

Why are we enablers for bottlers?

Premier Kathleen Wynne waded into the water controversy this week by acknowledging that it’s time to ask tough questions about the stewardship of this precious resource. Presumably the premier is buying time as the government evaluates an application quietly put forward this year by Nestle to secure a 10-year renewal at the Aberfoyle site.

But just as it’s a little too easy to demonize Nestle, it’s too simple to vilify the governing Liberals for perpetuating the prices and policies set by past governments. Obviously the rate set by Queen’s Park is absurdly low.

A higher markup would and should bolster our depleted treasury, while stricter controls could shore up the water table. (Protesters fret that water levels are under threat, while Nestle counters that it monitors the table closely).

But higher prices won’t much diminish consumption, given the bizarre premium people will pay for packaged convenience. The multi-billion-dollar bottled water industry, which has sprung up from nowhere (mountain springs being few and far between), is remarkably resilient.

Many of the protest organizers insist that no price is right - that private profit is antithetical to a public resource. But that’s akin to saying Coke and Pepsi should be denied access to our water table, along with Molson and Labatt, which seems a stretch (I’m trying to give the big breweries a break).

I can’t bear bottled water, especially after having to drink so much of it during a decade abroad as a foreign correspondent (and covering those water protests in India back in 2003). Back home, I worship our water fountains and taps as a Canadian blessing over bottles.

But it’s a free country, and if Torontonians insist on buying water bottled just outside the GTA, near Guelph, I support freedom of choice - though our local governments could give us better choices by insisting on more water fountains in public places and private spaces. Queen’s Park should also force producers (and consumers) to pay a fair price that reflects the true costs, while quantities should be restricted to protect the water table.

You can’t legislate against stupidity, and you can’t ban bottles. But there’s no reason to be suckered by big bottlers sucking our water out from under us.