ND accuses SYRIZA of “propensity for lies and baseless propaganda” in relation to the “privatization of water”, as the official opposition party claims.

The ND “Fake News Observatory” reports:

“1. “The Government is privatizing water”

This is a non-existent lie. The Government is doing the exact opposite: with Law 5037/2023, it protects the public nature of water and strengthens the supervision and insurance mechanisms in terms of quality and avoiding waste of this public good.
We made it clear from the beginning at every level that water was, is and will remain under public control.

But for the first time in the law brought by the Government with article 1 of the explanatory report and article 3 of the bill, the public nature of water providers is shielded.

2. “Kyriakos Mitsotakis had announced the privatization of water”

In SYRIZA they have an unparalleled penchant for lies and baseless propaganda. Even after the categorical denial of the Prime Minister, they continue the descent of mud and fake news.

Kyriakos Mitsotakis, in a question received on 24/3 in Brussels, clarified that water is not privatized.

In particular, he said: “I categorically assure you that there is absolutely no question of privatizing water, which was, is and will remain a public good.

And I really wonder if we will continue to march towards the election in the midst of an unacceptable environment of fake news. The Government has repeatedly explained exactly why it is strengthening the Energy Regulatory Authority with water-related powers. It has absolutely nothing to do with a potential privatization of water, which I have to tell you at the outset I reject.

Therefore, do not ask me, because the Government’s position is clear. Ask all those, who are still reproducing this fake news, which you categorically give me the opportunity today, at my level, to refute”.

3. “The Tsipras government ensured the public character of water”

The reality is that the government of Alexis Tsipras, with Law 4389/2016, transferred all the ownership shares of EYDAP and EYATH (Annex D’, article 197) to the Hellenic Holdings and Property Company (EESYP), also known as the Superfund. Essentially, that is, he mortgaged (and) the water for 99 years.

4. “The regulation brought by the Government opens the door to privatization”

The main purpose served by the regulation brought by the Government is to ensure transparency and accountability. We must ensure low prices and that the pricing of water is done in accordance with the law, while its quality must be measured systematically and in accordance with European directives.
In addition, in many European countries where water is managed by public bodies, there are Independent Regulatory Authorities. Market regulation is not only needed to regulate competition between individuals. We need and are building strong public water management agencies.
The opposition opposes a functional and modern system of governance through a National Strategy for the protection and management of surface and groundwater. Essentially, it is once again against the interests of the citizens, since we are promoting conditions of equal access, security of supply and water saving. In short, more and better water for citizens.

•Which pathologies does this specific regulation correct?

-The large fragmentation of water services into many providers (295 at the moment).
– The insufficient control of the financial data of the water service providers and the main cost centers.
-Insufficient data: Only 42% of organizations systematically submit the data required by law to the system platform.
– The disparity in terms of the rate of recovery of the costs of water supply and sewerage services. The cost recovery level of water supply and sewerage service providers, except EYDAP-EYATH which are more organized, ranges from 21% to 202%. In 2019 the overall loss rate of providers reaches up to 62%, and on average we have losses reaching 35.6%, when it comes to drinking water. There are TWO that claim to have 65% water losses.
-The lack of systematic mapping of the state of the water supply and sewerage network, in order to prioritize the required projects.
-The lack of sanctions in case of non-compliance with the rules of costing and invoicing of water services.