Glawischnig: “I think, the main issue is the discovery of water as a potential business field of the future. This is also indicated by the efforts of the Federation of Austrian Industry to create larger entities in Austria in order to improve the opportunities both in the field of wastewater treatment and in the export of know-how. The EU Commission is partly responsible for this development. You will remember that there had been a decision in favour of the creation of ‘Transeuropean Networks’ (water pipelines). Now the Union seems to have backed down.”

Schnattinger: “After the deregulation of electricity and gas the multi-utility providers in Europe are planning to establish themselves in the water sector. Their motto is: many different services from one provider. The prices would probably decrease and this would certainly be positive for the consumer. However, there is the big risk that public monopolies are simply replaced by private providers. Moreover, the EU Water Framework Directive will require major investments, also in our country. You know that the coalition government has cut the subsidies for the water clean-ups. We therefore demand that the subsidies be raised to their original level. At the same time we have no objections to the inflow of private capital. However, it is important for the communities not to sell their facilities, but to leave them to the investors only with respect to the service rights for a certain time.”

Fallent: “The consistent safeguarding of water resources is a great challenge today. The development of future-oriented supply and treatment structures is an important element in this challenge. Companies already active or planning to become active in this sector or related fields, have a vital interest in entering this market. At the same time it is the responsibility of governments to give those funds to the communities in the framework of the financial adjustment that they need for the implementation of laws. However, cooperation with domestic partners should not be avoided wherever synergies can be created. In this context it is important that the measures are customer-oriented, socially acceptable and ecologically sensible and that they guarantee both supply and treatment and water quality on a long-term basis.”

API: Does a possible quoting on the exchange (key word: NOSIWAG/EVN) not involve the risk that big international providers take part or take over?

Glawischnig: “In this respect the government is actually not being very honest! It makes a big difference if you have to act on the basis of mixed ownership or as a shareholding company with the obligation to yield profits. In addition, it was a mistake to take tax advantages from mixed ownership providers instead of supporting them in view of the export of know-how. This is being criticised today particularly by the NOSIWAG, but I don’t think that this company is really aware of the ensuing commercialisation and its consequences. I personally believe that this development is extremely problematic – particularly with regard to a possible participation of the European atomic giants EdF or EOn.”

Schnattinger: “The sale of the NOSIWAG is certainly a sin that will keep the Lower Austrian provincial government busy; for all that a precedent has probably been set. But since only regional networks exist on the water market it cannot be compared with the power sector. Our fathers knew what they were doing when they placed water supply and wastewater treatment under municipal management.”

Fallent: “We generally have to take care that no major powers are being concentrated when large companies merge and that we stick to multiple provider structures in Austria. As to the creation of multi-utility companies it is very important to me to see to it that the supply and treatment sector is not controlled by only a few, since the transparency of costs could otherwise be thwarted.”

API: What is your position with regard to drinking water?

Glawischnig: “For me the issue of water exports via pipelines is not completely dead. But I am not so much afraid of foreign water giants in this context. Much more do I fear the Austrian Forest Administration (OeBf AG) which could some time start with the pipeline business – by cubic metre/kilometre – maybe together with the OMV”.

Schnattinger: “Possible water exports (in bottles) are principally an opportunity for Austria, but a financially potent company would have to be found that could launch a label. If a company profits from the marketing of this natural good that belongs to society then the general public should also profit from the returns. This could, for example, be organised in the form of a ‘water fee’, i.e. a charge added to the retail price, which could amount to about 10 percent. This money should be earmarked for the purpose of making water supply and wastewater treatment cheaper for domestic customers. In my mind, water exports via pipelines are illusionary as long as desalination of seawater is comparably cheap.”

Fallent: “The Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Environment and Water Management has commissioned a study dealing with this subject. This discussion is part of a process, the end of which is not in sight.”

API: What is your opinion on the sale of Austrian lakes to the Austrian Forest Administration?

Glawischnig: “To be honest – this is a complete nonsense, also with regard to the budget. According to an assessment expertise the Minister of Finances will not cash more than ATS 1 billion. National forests and lakes could have been jointly managed without any transfer of ownership. We have strongly opposed this budget dressing, as you know.”

Schnattinger: “I don’t expect any consequences for the consumer with regard to water supply. However, we have to note that due to our legal provisions (property owners possess water rights) international companies are striving to obtain water rights. Of course, this sale is highly questionable in view of nature conservation and the preservation of recreational spaces, particularly because it irretrievably squanders public property.”

Fallent: “The decision has been made; now it has to be implemented in a sensible way. In addition, I expect that the Austrian population will continue to be able to use natural spaces as it is used to.”

API: In your opinion, how should domestic water management and wastewater treatment be structured in the future?

Glawischnig: “For me, both are regional and communal key tasks and this should not change! We do not oppose increasing professionalism and mergers that make sense, but our small structures should principally be maintained. My party will continue to oppose the outsourcing or privatisation – mainly by information campaigns.”

Schnattinger: “For the Social Democrats, water supply and wastewater treatment is a central task of the communes. Mergers have already taken place wherever they were necessary – e.g. in the form of wastewater associations. I have the feeling that problems are being artificially created! In addition, this is a subject, which is decisive for communal budgets. But when or how investments are to be made must not be decided in Frankfurt or Paris.”

Fallent: “Future-oriented water supply and wastewater treatment using established technologies would be adapted to the structures and needs of people. My favoured variants are, of course, near-natural solutions.”

API: Thank you for the interviews!

(Source: aqua press Int. 02/2001)