Summary of all East
November 9, 2010
following is an update of the Community Council of East Ensemble devoted to water management. Each speaker may also supplement its response by sending the proposed amendments ( mail). We made our comments in italics.
As on previous occasions, the audience was just over five present, they are seventy people, half of which remained standing, who attended the four-hour debate. Exciting. With a big shift, admittedly, between the dynamism and richness of the defenders of public management, and the series of errors (or lies?) Pro-Veolia shameful mistakes that the audience was very knowledgeable even corrected by its murmurs ...
In the end, Bertrand Kern, president, debate was synthesized in a totally false, leading to a re-SEDIF membership, while almost all interventions had argued to the contrary. Citizens must have the last word: if for the moment-between voters and the multinational-PS is quite attracted by the multinational, things can still change if people continue to speak out strongly, but there is very little time!
M. Kern (PS, Pantin mayor and president of East together) remember what a whole (including the cities were all in SEDIF) took on water as a skill, which caused the output makes cities SEDIF. Is set then requested a study in Cali. Follows a chronology that shows that the debate has hitherto concerned that the Office ...
Calia will try in a half-hour show "the complexity of the case." Including the provision, participation in decisions, costs, management, quantity, quality, legal aspects are at 1 January 2011 ...
LEGAL (cabinet Sartorio):
1st possibility: delegation of public service, with partial membership or total EE at SEDIF. SEDIF and Veolia have only considered the total membership of EA in the case of a partial membership it will renegotiate a new future ... and the cities nonadherent should be a union.
second possibility: non-adherence, while governance, leasing, etc.. but these procedures take some time, so what to do from 1 January 2011?
Why this extension agreement is not possible? Because the convention is over ( we always knew ). Especially since SEDIF no longer bound by his contract is expired, the new contract ends end of 2010, there is a new contract in 2011. Is
assembly can itself manage the water authority, concluding with SEDIF or Eaux de Paris, and buy its wholesale water (no market for it, it is OTC). However we need markets for maintenance work, etc.. These markets are subject to public procurement rules (statement, deadlines). However, we understand what can not pass Together these markets since it does not know his real wealth ('s Veolia and SEDIF who manages live past 88 years ... ). TECHNICAL
(Hydratec): Is
whole can not produce its drinking water in sufficient quantity
It takes 70,000 m3/day, even if 100.000m3 peak. Let SEDIF or Eaux de Paris can provide these amounts.
Eastern Ensemble is currently connected to a broader network, he must sign out in the case of an output of SEDIF. Similarly, it is necessary to restore balance to the cuts made by the output of some cities in the network.
Eaux de Paris says it can not proceed without a study ... ( it goes without saying, we have always said so, they must ask for them to study the make! ) but it seems to makes possible the firm Eaux de Paris PCQ important means of pressure to power ... to see EA though ... ('s good news: they are finally admitting that Eau de Paris we can provide! )
The price of water Water by Paris would be between 50 to 60 centimes/m3.
Corinne Valls (Mayor of Romainville) begins with a point of satisfaction, we can have that debate ... to bring this issue at the institutional level because of supposed truths have been dealt major blow to blogs or leaflets ( it sounds like Sarkozy discuss the case Bettencourt, Ah, the wicked blogs that attack the good guys honest politicians ... ). Are there any politicians willing to make the choice of a multinational corporation against the interests of their fellow citizens? ( YES! ) When he had to make a choice in governance, Romainville voted for public ownership ( is good! ). Some of those who agitated does not arise the question ... ( who discovers the problem of water today?! ) should ask themselves the questions of nature, price, and investment. It does not meet the feasibility of a public utility. Is it reasonable make an alternative bid, then we can return to SEDIF ( bah, here is the first admission that costs ... ) to 1.41 € / m3 when it is € 1.75 / m3 now (actually 1.747), whereas it is the water quality and rapid response with SEDIF and Veolia ( it remains to be seen ... ). Yes, we support Romainville rejoin the SEDIF ( "in Romainville" or "you", Ms. Valls? ). And I dream of a public utility is all that happens, it may seem a crazy dream (especially is anything SEDIF and Eaux de Paris are already themselves overproduction! ).
Alain Peries (Chevènement Pantin) questions about an item p. 8., 4, 22, 28 ...
Jakubowicz Jacques (Bondy PC) : the community council includes 9 cities left, a priori values that we share as a property of humanity must be liberated from the grip of money. But we play with us, the delegation of public service entrusted to Veolia does not amount to a "public" service: UFC and others have shown the billing. Veolia Environnement is a multinational, which is used to relocate a branch taxes, the shareholders are the major group (AXA, etc..). Calia has made his study. Many assumptions and confusing place: every man for himself, leaving one part, two resolutions at the next Community Board ... It is totally ridiculous to imagine that we can leave one day of SEDIF if we returned. The price of water would fall in case of public management in crisis is important. Calia had still not made contact in September with Eaux de Paris, I've seen. Same as water on the quantities of Paris could be provided (this was rectified ...). The assumptions were validated SEDIF without being reflected by Calia. And we arrive at an assumption of 130 million gap, the confusion implicit in this is: "Why be bothered with these assumptions? "It grows back to SEDIF! Working seriously to these hypotheses public ownership and it takes a real dialogue with the population, as we say collectively since the creation of East together ( bah yes but it was a bluff, there was nobody left to take ). I am against re-joining the SEDIF to maintain competence water to agglomerate, against cuts in some towns of the chipboard ( assumption of public management duo apart from other cities in Bagnolet and Montreuil ).
Alain Callas (Greens in Montreuil) FULL INTERVENTION: At its constitution, our Community has wanted to put the water in the center of his interests by making it an area of expertise. It was not a compulsory jurisdiction and yet we thought that a common policy on water, its distribution would be an improvement for our citizens. Our group
ecology and citizenship "endorsed this approach, since its initiation.
Our objective was to study the best conditions for a return to a service and public management of water, governed by a formal public as was recently done a number of cities on the left. Water, a utility to recover. Paris and others have shown us the path.
is in this sense that the community wanted to be framed with the advice of an expert firm to help us in our choice for a water policy whose transparent objective is the satisfaction of our fellow citizens rather the search for the best margin as the current practice SEDIF provider. We recall the 58% margin enjoyed by the Veolia contract SEDIF. These figures UFC Que Choisir was never formally denied.
Unfortunately time limit for the office was short. The study results have not lived up to our expectations if we want to decide this year. Hence the need to give time. I'll take a few examples: A
been hidden in a plausible alternative supply of water by water of Paris, including the cost of M3 is 1.04 € compared to the proposal of 1.51 € in Veolia's best case, even with prices "tightened".
Meetings with Eau de Paris, and after the recent surrender of the study, however, seem to show the importance of further study of partnership.
We will not dwell on the inaccuracies of the report. Imprecision and fuzzy numbers as the cost of output SEDIF, measurement bases volumes of water consumed or the cost of network changes that range from 60.5 million to € 190.8 million €! Ditto for the price range for the possible construction of reservoirs that range from 20 to 100 million euros.
Redemption Heritage "is also being estimates risky (10 to 12 million euros) because our municipalities have already contributed to the establishment of heritage SEDIF, probably 10%, which would reduce this cost to zero .... The experience of recent and near Viry-Châtillon is instructive in this regard, it is unfortunately not mentioned in the paper that was given to us.
admit, it is difficult in these conditions, we elected to assess the accuracy of decisions.
I remember one additional element that could have been given: Water of Paris has frozen any rate increase until 2014 while the contract SEDIF-VEOLIA (which increased its rates by 17% over the last 6 years) provides a possible revision every three months for a 12-year contract. Is it really serious to almost unconscionable clauses? In 12 years, the bill will increase 48 times.
Given the need to equip ourselves with all data relevant to the decision,
our group "Ecology and Citizenship Q'una application period is used to conduct a thorough exploration of the possibilities for public ownership , feasibility and potential connection with Eau de Paris, as part of an open and democratic debate. Nothing prevents a solution, transient and not binding on the long term is found (section 144 of the Code of Procurement). This period of two years is possible and necessary.
You know, our civic and environmental awareness leads us to pay special attention to water. A takeover of the entire process of production / distribution / treatment would not only prevent waste, but also the application of social tariffs modulated (progressive and not regressive), providing a living wage free or cheap. This would be consistent with our common desire to support the most vulnerable of our citizens.
In addition, a dynamic policy of resource conservation and an intelligent management of wastewater and its recovery for district heating for example. Could be implemented. The examples are not lacking in Europe and in many French cities, and it would be a real added value of this new public service.
Many of us in this meeting to show our commitment to defending public services, the opportunity is given to us on this issue to advance this idea. Let's do it together in a transparent and democratic dialogue with the wider users.
our group's proposals are clear and common sense:
-Give us time to study objectively and thoroughly and do not leave the jurisdiction "water" of the chipboard. To this end, incur a 2-year interim agreement to maintain the cohesion of the Commonwealth of Agglo.
-Organize discussions and consult with our fellow citizens by referendum in each of our cities,
-Dare to ask for a return to public ownership, cost and transparency. Reaffirm the primacy of the interests public over private interests. Water is not a commodity, it is a common good which all have rights.
-Daring the establishment of a genuine social policy also calls for water as the Collective Defence of Public Service composed of parties that we find a majority in the assembly and as recommended by the Fondation France Liberté chaired by Danielle Mitterrand .
In summary,
Daring policy left with ideals that move us to a public utility board, dare to win back public management.
Roger Gilbert (PS Bondy) , I agree with intervention that has been made. At present, the PS is in a meeting to include in particular water from public property, how the group that I chair could there be opposite ( good question they must answer! Look at the same time, he announces that he speaks for all socialists from East together ...). SEDIF is an organization created by elected officials to citizens. But SEDIF has a form of governance that is not acceptable today, a city has a voice so small villages right weigh as much as big cities on the left. Water for all services to 1.41 € / m3.
Eaux de Paris is tempting, Parisians have decided to have a system of public ownership. For us, there is this temptation but there are still many gray areas to see if we can technically be served by this structure in all respects, and that implementation is done as soon as possible. And there are too many uncertainties.
No city has asked its output SEDIF before.
We would not have had the discussion without the withdrawal of SEDIF. We can thank us collectively have done that ( definition of self-congratulation ... ).
I do not want to be a customer SEDIF nor the waters of Paris. No governance. I've never read any advice from Paris that Paris wanted involve cities in water governance ( you have read anything at all, naughty, and who asked the question in Paris anyway?? ? )
All this will take time, pending the return SEDIF ( room there had a good laugh, you had been seen coming a mile off, with your comb and your shoe SEDIF VEOLIA ... All this for that, looks like Lelouch ) because each of our citizens enjoy security and price advantage of reaccession. We often have discussions to enter or leave cities of Trade Unions ( WRONG! no city is out of SEDIF since 1923! )
I am told that if we re-joined the SEDIF, we take for 12 years, but the lakes are in the Essonne well out! ( anything: it has nothing to do because they have put into chipboard, like us, otherwise they should stay there! ).
I do not want that on 1 January our citizens have more water (400,000 cut? Absurd for Veolia and the prefect may requisition the provision of water! ), or whether more expensive ( SEDIF but is more expensive and it does not bother him! ). Paris water pact with the devil because it is the counters that Veolia ( that's why we want to load all of Veolia?! ). Pragmatism prevails for me.
Daniel Bernard (Left Party, Bagnolet) : the first meeting I spoke on this point with a petition launched on it not the Left Party. The study was conducted from June to September (four months and during holidays), she explores insufficiently any alternative. The report from Paris as water could not ... The firm has confirmed that it was possible otherwise. We know that the price decline on average by 25% with the ride board. While for SEDIF is 17% over the last six years. And the possibility to increase prices every three months for SEDIF. The water quality is also taken into account, there is a significant presence of aluminum 102 to 126 mg / l in water SEDIF. Therefore a new agreement.
Pierre Desgranges (Citizen, Apt Europe Ecology, Montreuil) : The new points of Hydratec show the feasibility of Paris with water. On depreciation, there would be 0.4% of network turnover / year by Veolia in SEDIF would therefore require 250 years to renew the network. The price estimates over 12 years by Veolia are indecipherable, and there are fears of exponential increases. Instead there would be between 1.24 and 1.30 € / m3 for Eaux de Paris ... Even at 1.31 € / m3 is more profitable ( follows a very long explanation figures that we have not taken ... ), even at a higher starting price, is profitable for citizens.
Sylvie Badoux (approx. PC, Bondy) COMPLETE RESPONSE: My comments are not technical but political and forgive me and my somewhat provocative attitude will be politically free because I either I did not join a party.
It seems important at this stage of the debate to recall some principles and values we have decided to wear loud and clear in this meeting. I mean:
- implement innovative public policies and make ambitious plans,
- act for the rights of our citizens,
- develop public services,
- a model of democracy.
However, debates over water took place in our cities, on the initiative of associations, collectives, and few, but never at the initiative of the urban community! I also below the elbow Bondynois 740 signatures of citizens who wished to be part of our discussion on water. They affirmed their desire that our work leads to a public water management.
Then on the question of the choice of water management, ideologically, things are simple. All parties "so-called leftist" have positioned themselves as defenders of the official public services, all agree on this common state of well water.
So what ... Recently, we heard on the topic: "yes, but it's complicated ..." If it were easy, we would all already have a public ownership. Maybe even some cities have established a municipal association even before the creation of the urban community ... but ultimately, it is now and not before things are possible. Today we have this unique opportunity and we must not waste it! We have already lost a year with a study that leaves us too many questions and even discontent. They say
also: "It's going to cost us dear" But finally, after having commissioned a consulting firm, we do not really know how much ... And then it already costs so expensive to 400,000 people!
It said: "Eau de Paris, hummm not trust" Ha ... good! Yet it manages to supply every home in Paris already safely and assurance we were given a sufficient volume to supply Eastern Ensemble.
I also heard: "wait and see! "Yes, but in the meantime, what can you do?
"Well, we must rejoin the SEDIF "I am told! Ha! And why have signed a provisional agreement, then? And how do we get out then? We will need the express approval of at least 50% of other members of SEDIF, knowing that the price they will pay the same water will increase because they will let us go? I do not believe for one second if I were them, I will not let leave SEDIF IS ALL! So we can do a mix of SEDIF and EAU DE PARIS ... but why did you transfer the water then?
All these arguments, the discourse of fear, not the responsibility ...
So SEDIF SEDIF or not ... That is the question. What's wrong? Why the left did so much harm to take a political and ideological positioning while sitting on the right of elected SEDIF not arise any question when it comes to fighting public service of water and fight ferociously for VEOLIA remainder beneficiary of the market?
Well I say "do politics! "Be strong! Weigh into the debate ... "This is one reason why we joined I think. Here we have a real political battle to be taken to governance Shared or for a board's own town.
In the present context, we must accurately measure the distortion between the commitments IS SET and the vote of its elected representatives would be misunderstood. Indeed, how can we explain to our citizens than is possible in Grenoble, Rouen, Besancon, Castres, Viry-Chatillon, would not be possible in East Together?
Maybe some of my colleagues believe to abstain. But forbear, is to miss an opportunity to position themselves politically, is to abandon some of its values, some of the very foundations of the ideology which underpins our commitment. This is in any case not assume!
Also, November 23, regardless of their political affiliation, voting by elected community "is called left" should reflect a rejection of this outrageous system that is the privatization of water management . If they are faithful to their commitments, those of their respective parties, and finally the values of the founding text of IS SET, they should vote for public management, democratic, environmentally and socially responsible for this resource essential to life.
Dominique Attia (FASE Montreuil, Alter-agglo93) INTERVENTION FULL : We note that out before the terms of debate have changed considerably in the right direction, a few months. Earlier this year, was to assess the advantages and disadvantages of private management, through adherence to SEDIF, and public management, through a partnership with the municipal authority in Paris. This could appear as a technical debate, lack of clear policy direction and shared. Several months
debates between politicians, experts with the firm CALIA, and especially with an unprecedented intervention associations and citizens have been there. Of public debates were held in Bagnolet, Montreuil, Les Lilas, Pantin, others are expected to Bondy and Romainville. Hundreds and hundreds of our citizens have signed a petition calling us to "take all necessary steps to achieve a public management of water." Dozens of articles have been published on blogs, contributing to the formation of public opinion. The water management has become the first political debate of our young city!
So now the question is posed differently. A large majority of us favor public management of water, "public good of humanity" as written by Roger Gilbert. It must be stated that the urban community must have control of that service. Today it's going in the right direction since the idea of a comprehensive study, with all field data that have been sorely lacking in the study CALIA, working closely with public water service in Paris and elected officials in Paris to define in a concrete form that could take an alternative public now seems accepted by most of us.
Returning on some highlights of this debate.
- We sometimes hear that the output of SEDIF requires significant investment that will be costly to prevent agglomeration and to concentrate on other urban projects for which it was created! What is wrong of course because this is not the general budget which finances investments in water and sanitation but the bill are that abounds the water budget and the sanitation .
- As elected representatives, we are legitimately concerned that our citizens do not pay too much access to water. For the right to water should be respected, say international experts, it is necessary that the bill is not more than 3% of household costs. A threshold unfortunately exploded SEDIF where, according to a survey conducted last June OBUSASS, the poorest must devote up nearly 10% of their budgets on water. It gives me a strong reason not to continue with the system-SEDIF VEOLIA.
- still regard the price of water, the report suggests a very hypothetical CALIA € 1.41 / m3 (for the water bill) for a re-accession to CAEE SEDIF. This does not correspond to reality current, nor that tomorrow, there is much to be feared! Recall that the actual price is now € 1.73 / m3 SEDIF. It should fall to 1.51 € / m3 at 1 January 2011 with the new contract, Veolia SEDIF. But it is reviewed every three months. And that over the last six years it increased by 17%. And that the three plants will be refurbished SEDIF in the next five years at a cost of 575 million euro: what will be the impact for users?
- Still on the water tariff, the report CALIA did not see fit to mention the current rate of water in Paris € 1.04 / m 3, or the commitment by the City Council of Paris to the establishment of the Board not to increase the rate until 2014. I am able to report a scoop tonight: Given the very good results with a return to public management since 1 January 2010, 40 million have been saved, the president of Eau de Paris announced publicly lower the price of water in Paris in the coming months!
short, the comparison of water rates between Paris and SEDIF today like yesterday and tomorrow as today, there is no picture, the interests of users controls the choice of governance.
- For employees, there is no picture either. In the case of the creation of a board, all private sector employees who wish may join the new government structure as was the case in Paris. For cons, the new contract with VEOLIA-SEDIF, all employees will not be repeated! This has been announced at the meeting of the establishment of Veolia Water suburb of Paris October 26, 2010 The one-sided contract was revised downward pressure associations and elected officials, but no question VEOLIA Touching the shareholders' dividends, it is employees who will pay the price!
- The quality of the water, I am sorry again that this issue has not really been studied by Cali because it is a major concern for people. According to the director of the documentary "poison in the water tap" broadcast on France 3, SEDIF still uses aluminum salts for the separation of water. And indeed, we found significant amounts in the water supply in our city. And these substances are strongly suspected to be a major cause of Alzheimer's disease. For its part, Eau de Paris uses iron chlorides whose safety is recognized.
- Another important point that concerns us all is the exercise of our responsibility as elected officials. In the case of a partnership with Paris, we are part of normal relations between elected. With SEDIF is a completely different reality that is. This is explained Mr. Santini, president of SEDIF for 25 years, in an interview in September 2004: "Obviously, I believe that the General Water Company was originally in 1923 , the creation of the Syndicat intercommunal water for the suburbs of Paris that I chair today. " Under the leadership of Mr. Santini SEDIF just renewed for twelve more years, his contract with Veolia will reach 100 years and without interruption. Do not wait a century to free ourselves from the grip of the General!
-Some are now saying, okay to delve deeply into an alternative public with Paris, but in the meantime, re-adhere to SEDIF! If East joins the Ensemble SEDIF, she can not go out ... without the consent of all members of SEDIF! Or after lengthy legal procedures and risky. Who wants to take such a risk? By cons, if adhering Is Set SEDIF not that it runs through the study of the conditions of public management, it will always be in case of failure, the possibility for two years to return to SEDIF. The report states CALIA (p4) that "this new membership (of the CAEE SEDIF) must be within maximum two years after signing the contract (SEDIF-VEOLIA).
- Regarding issues of time to make a decision, I would like to emphasize the possibility of taking the time necessary to model based on real data from a public water management in East Ensemble. Indeed, in the report Cali (pp28 and 68), we read:
'application for accession to the CAEE SEDIF:
-The deadline for accepting a new member is 3 months
-For a membership on 1 January, CAEE will have to deliberate before September 30 "
It is therefore clear that even if the CAEE decided to join the SEDIF November 23, it would not stick on 1 January 2011 and should find a temporary solution for two months . Leave to spend a tentative agreement, take the two years that seem necessary to study and reflection on an alternative solution.
There is one last point which has not been raised so far and makes it nearly impossible to vote Nov. 23. The Community Council met
September 21, 2010 decided to establish the Advisory Commission on Public Services (Local CCSPL) east of the city together.
Article L1413-1 of the General Local Authorities (CGCT) states in part that CCSPL
"is available for review by the deliberative assembly or the legislative body to: 1 °
Any proposed public service delegation before the deliberative or legislative body decides as provided by Article L.1411-4:
2 ° Every proposal to establish a board with financial autonomy, before the decision establishing the authority; "
It is common knowledge that membership SEDIF returns to delegate public services to Veolia Water. The CCSPL must be consulted and to comment before the decision by the city. Ditto if it is decided to create a public utility. And the opinion of the CCSPL must be brought to the attention of community advisors before their decision. Do not do
weaken the decision of the city by making him run a significant legal risk. Given the stakes of the debate and the different positions expressed in this chamber but also in terms of associations and the public, it seems absolutely necessary to secure our decision, and therefore do not take the risk of a risky vote Nov. 23 and take the time necessary for the consultation of CCSPL.
For Patrick Lascoux (Greens Noisy-le-Sec) COMPLETE RESPONSE , as delegate to the Agenda21, I want to remember that water management is central to any approach to sustainable development.
I thank our President and the various stakeholders for allowing us to debate on water.
Faced with financial issues raised by its management, it seems useful to overcome the unique technical and legal approach. The price and technical should not obscure the qualitative and user satisfaction.
Just as waste treatment, water is certainly one of the most important skills of East Ensemble.
Water is the element most commonly used reference for assessing the quality of our environment, it is unusual to keep all traces of our activities especially the most polluting. We chose to
Is Set to bring a sustainable development strategy and we asked about the water management proposed by the Sedif / Veolia.
The studies show that alternative procurement of potable water is possible. And how often to change, some are showing reluctance and we intend to wait 12 years! They cite good reasons not to do. I found some at our various exchanges:
- What do I do if I have a leak? or my pipes are too small.
- Is Set has jurisdiction to make the water in different cities!
- Let's try the experiment of an output of only a few cities Sedif!
What about the Community interest,
- Why leave if Sedif to restart on a contract with Veolia! or my pipes are too small!
As if Veolia was inevitable, yet we have the choice of Allot this market to provide various benefits and prevent the dumping of Veolia cartel.
- Why Are All the towns before they have done nothing to change public management! Well yes! A Noisy-le-Sec when we voted 2008 a vow of Sedif destined to return to public management, but unfortunately, as you know, it is not this option was chosen by the Sedif.
But let's not forget the essential protection of this resource is vital for future generations.
The price should not be the sole criterion, although Veolia carries wide margin.
protection zones bailing is not satisfactory, yet it would avoid heavy investments that are now funded by the communities.
The pipe maintenance is insufficient, as shown by the study, the rate of leakage does not diminish over time. The volumes are still charged and lost, but more importantly, lack of maintenance on the network is compensated by a systematic use of additives such as chlorine which seem to have an impact on our health and preservation of freshwater resources.
The inhabitants of East Ensemble are increasingly involved, they are attached to a more eco responsible for water and the introduction of social tariffs in its price (eg where a great price Libourne bottom has been established for the first 15 m3.). Today, our 9 cities, due to problems delinquency, families no longer have access to piped water. This situation is not tolerable.
I think we have an opportunity here to give us extra time to make this change as other communities have already adopted such as Paris and Cherbourg, ... and bring a message of hope to our citizens.
I remind you that we are a gathering of mostly left alone and that public management can permanently protect this resource, water must be a common property of mankind as well as the air we breathe.
Marie-Genevieve Lentaigne (Greens, The Lilacs ): I do not understand Ms. Valls and M. Roger, who say they want a public administration, and they intervened to public management before. After this failure, why retourrner? And imagine how it returns to come out? It's a sham. What it means to be elected if it is out of the dictatorship of the short-term, assuming what is best for the people. Public management is mathematically it is more favorable to our citizens that a multinational opaque which makes huge profits. Time to deliver, voters we do not understand if we returned to SEDIF, they tell us about the markets.
Georgia Vincent (UMP Bondy) : Water is a public good, which has a cost whether public or private. It will not be free. Quality and cost are important only population, the issue of public or private are not interested in people (Hall and protest Kern recalls assistance in order ...) I'm not saying that one should not change but we do not have enough insurance.
Voynet (Greens in Montreuil) : We probably would not have had this debate in these terms six months ago, advance the debate with the many discussions that have taken place. The choices is not an ideological choice, but it is a political choice. We want to make a positive choice, whereas this was not the case before. Roger Gilbert noted that no city was out of SEDIF. We found that Eau de Paris may, it's cheaper. We are off-time on the two scenarios (contract with SEDIF before setting up a board, or return to SEDIF), anyway. I wanted to focus on the community dimension to Montreuil, it is not in our mental landscape leaving only the face of common SEDIF but we do not want to rejoin, because no city will leave us out to see its local price increase. There is a historic opportunity with the chipboard. Joint association with Paris (my preference) or a board of East Ensemble. Some advocates of a return to SEDIF have the nerve to blame everything is done in the public waters of Paris, the big deal? In our city either! The difference is that we do not give a blank check to a company for 12 years!
Aline Archimbaud (Greens, Pantin) The study can serve as a basis for the elect community. It was made during the summer. It takes 2 years to do. We could not show the SEDIF; returned if there is 12 years. The convention is legally possible but it will be very hard, he must negotiate.
Alain Périès (Chevènement Pantin) : Debate difficult, you know our political position to a board, it is not those who let their ideals at the door. We are all agreed to enter into a discussion SEDIF to exit, or choose to return Eaux de Paris, there may be other avenues to explore (there admittedly, is confusing, but it was late , what alternative ? ). If one is willing to leave SEDIF, with political will, we will leave SEDIF! ( no comment, it's just anything ... ).
Ms. Breviary (MODEM, Bobigny) : thank you for coming to the public for this choice that will engage the public. Whereas the various options outside the SEDIF (for Calia) are not satisfactory, ask the elected community is like asking an ideological position. Yes we can say that water is a common good, but the non-preparation of a management change makes it impossible for this choice.
Bertrand Kern request firms and then Calia Sartorio: Is it possible to make an agreement with SEDIF?
Cabinet Sartorio : The extension is not possible (everybody knows, but this is not the issue ...) for a new contract, he must know what you want (eg market Veolia new contract), if by mandate, must make a deal. If there is no mandate, service delivery and work is hazardous.
Bertrand Kern : What about the indexation of prices SEDIF?
Cabinet Sartorio : every three months, depending on productivity gains (Frozen first three years, rather a reduction factor). This does not Veolia to increase every three months (it is "indexing" and "increase").
Kern: And the output of SEDIF, is it not possible before 12?
Sartorio : Legally possible, politically, it depends on the members ... ( the thing was already sweating ).
Christian Lagrange (PS The Lilacs, vice-president in charge of water, formerly representing the Lilac SEDIF) : Much has been say. The three firms mandated gave us valuable information to make our choice. We met seven cities to see what was happening. It evokes very generally questions and future questions to ask ...
Bertrand Kern : What can we learn? Chipboard that keeps the water authority. We continue the studies to see how to manage in the coming years. On 23, we will continue the studies. The report
Calia appeal anymore now that makes possible the purchase of water Eaux de Paris ( yes, they recognized the truth-painfully- : That public ownership is possible! ).
I have a dream like having a Libourne social tariffs, or as in Paris to have a public utility ( Kern wants attention but it's still a dream is the trick ... ).
But what this report says is that it can be viable and it is hard to deny.
The return to public management of water is not sustainable within 3 years or 4 years ( and why not 12? Is 2 years! ). This debate is not determined. We must be sure of cost, time and governance.
And if the majority municipal exchange in Paris? ( And then SEDIF is right, it does not provide the water! )
How is between 1 January 2011 and when we can make a board. Legally it is clear: we can not make a new agreement ( WRONG! Reread the firm's response Sartorio! ), who sell water in bulk? It will make a bid for the network, maintenance, probably that Veolia wins ( and then at SEDIF, they are the same ... ).
can also rejoin the SEDIF ( oh, big shoes ... ), but there is uncertainty, we are not sure you can come out ( string is very big ).
And he repeated the move: the first of January, I am grateful that the water flows in faucets (see above ).
0 comments:
Post a Comment