Water privatisation continues to be a contentious issue in the country today. Even as it faces a scenario where increasing numbers of its populace will be subjected to water scarcity, the indignation over attempts to privatise supply and distribution is rising. There are activists who rightly call attention to the fact that water is a basic commodity linked to life at many levels and hence, a fundamental right of every citizen. As noted in the UN human rights statement on right to water, “the human right to water entitles everyone to sufficient, safe, acceptable, physically accessible and affordable water for personal and domestic uses. An adequate amount of safe water is necessary to prevent death from dehydration, reduce the risk of water-related diseases and provide for consumption, cooking, personal and domestic hygienic requirements.” It is equally true that a large section of the population in the country cannot afford to pay for this essential commodity. By allowing private players into the arena of water supply, the fear is that these deprived sections would be exploited for profits.

However, there is also a need to look at the scenario from another angle, and that is the angle of mismanagement and wastage of what is turning to be a extremely scarce commodity. In most of the cities,  water lost in leakages and pilferage amounts to a whopping 54 percent of the water supplied. The water boards and municipal bodies are largely apathetic and unaccountable. It is also an undeniable truth that most of us are still inclined to waste water that comes at a cheap price. We must recognise that the water delivered to our homes is priced way below the costs involved in pumping, treating and delivering it.

Privatisation need not mean transferring ownership of the water resource, but merely of the delivery service. With differential pricing in place to ensure that the poor are not fleeced, and the state playing a vigilant role, it could be a judicious option. In many cases, it has been witnessed that the poor are not averse to paying up for a service as long as they are guaranteed regular supply. Whether it be Kundapur, or Tirupur or Pune, with an efficient system in place, the residents have been satisfied. An interesting model would be for private players to be enrolled in setting up the system, with the financing mechanism being partly funded by the community. Once the repayment is complete, the local body could take over the management. Finally, it is time we recognised our responsibilities towards this vanishing commodity even as we demand our rights.