EKIP– Expert Club for Economics and Politics A Different Opinion
I'll put it bluntly. The creation of a common, centralized state water and sewerage holding that would unite all water and sewerage companies across the country is phenomenally stupid. The idea that such a holding could prevent more problems like the one with the water supply in Pernik from occurring is absurd. The creation of such a holding betrays either a misunderstanding of the problem that led to the water crisis in Pernik or a deliberate attempt to centralize and seize more power despite it. With the aim of distributing even more money stolen from taxpayers to "our" people. Or maybe both.
How exactly will a centralized water and sewerage company solve the problem?
One of the main factors that led to the water crisis in Pernik was the inadequate work of the ultimate control institutions in the form of the Ministry of Environment and Water and the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works. Whether this is due to negligence, corruption or simply poor communication is another question. But the fact is that someone in the ministries has not done their job and that is why there are (quite ostentatious) investigations and arrests of ministers. If we simply create another huge centralized control structure, what does this change in itself? We will have another person to arrest for negligence (the head of the holding), but this does not solve the structural problem that brought us here.
The second factor (which is also related to the first) is the extremely low quality of the water supply infrastructure in Pernik, which leads to the loss of about 70% of the water in the network due to lack of investment. This problem will also not be solved by creating a centralized water supply holding. Yes, a lot of money can now be poured into Pernik for this purpose, but it is very doubtful whether it will be spent qualitatively, given the tragic quality of the state's work in this area so far.
Not to mention all the rumors that have been heard in the media about corruption schemes that have led to the draining of the Studena dam. Even if we patch up Pernik right now, a similar problem could appear somewhere else. Even the more we centralize control over the water supply structures in the country, the more likely this is to happen, precisely in view of the inadequacy of the higher institutions in the sector.
We add another link to the chain of collective carelessness
Think about it for a moment. If a large centralized Water and Sewerage Holding is created, whose property will it be? State-owned. If it is state-owned, it must be under the control of a ministry. Which ministry will this be? Logically, the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works, which by law regulates all Water and Sewerage companies. And it will still have to cooperate with the Ministry of Environment and Water due to the fact that this ministry has responsibilities related to the country's water bodies. That is, the only thing that will be achieved by creating a common Water and Sewerage Holding, in the best case scenario, is the addition of another institution to the regulatory chain.
This means further complicating the communication process between institutions at the local level (municipality and municipal water supply) and those at the national level (ministries and now the central water supply before them). By creating a state-wide water supply company, the government will literally increase the risk of future water crises like the one in Pernik, because it will further complicate the regulatory process, which has already gone wrong once with catastrophic consequences. Remember that cliché "insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result"? This is the same, but even crazier.
A much better idea, instead of risking turning all of Bulgaria into Pernik through centralization, is to do the exact opposite. To decentralize the entire public structure responsible for financing and controlling the water and sanitation companies in Bulgaria. Because, as is obvious, the large state structures responsible for regulating the activities of the water and sanitation companies, to put it mildly, are not doing their job very well.
Doing the same thing and expecting a different result is madness.
Therefore, let's concession ViK Pernik and all local water supply companies on the model of ViK Sofia. Whatever skepticism you may have about concessions specifically in Bulgaria, ViK Sofia is categorically the best performing water supply company in the country. Obvious facts cannot be denied - the concession here works many times better than the state government, no matter how we compare them. Whether we compare the financial indicators of ViK Sofia with those of other water supply companies around the country or are interested in the quality of water and the service for end users, the picture is crystal clear. ViK Sofia leads in all respects.
Concessioning would naturally lead to an inflow of investments to improve the quality of the water and sanitation infrastructure in cities like Pernik. Without the need for the state to pour in public resources, the majority of which will most likely be spent poorly or wasted. With a concession, state institutions themselves actually have an incentive to be more careful in their regulatory activities in this regard - because the money and profits do not go to them, but to a private company.
The solution must be sought in the opposite direction.
Secondly, let's decentralize the regulatory functions of the MRDPW and the MOEW to local regional and municipal governments. This primarily shortens the chain of communication, which reduces the risk of communication errors between different institutional levels and allows for faster action to be taken to address emerging problems. And it also places regulatory responsibility in the hands of institutions that have much more up-to-date, detailed and timely information about the state of the relevant water bodies and water supply infrastructure, not to mention the specific needs and problems of the local population.
However, that is why they are local institutions – because they deal with specifically local cases. On the other hand, national institutions such as ministries and the planned central Water and Sewerage Holding only have partial, summarized information, which is provided to them by these local institutions. Therefore, let's simply leave the regulatory responsibility in the hands of these local institutions. This would also solve the problem of collective irresponsibility, which is formed around the entire water crisis. It was never clear who was ultimately to blame. Former Minister Neno Dimov? What about the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works and Minister Avramova? What about the local authorities? Water and Sewerage Pernik?
After the concession decentralization of regulatory responsibility, it is clear that if something goes wrong, the local authorities are ultimately to blame for not adequately controlling the concessionaire. They bear the ultimate control responsibility and, accordingly, the ultimate political responsibility. Simple and clear. Responsibility is not scattered across two ministries and several other lower-ranking public institutions. The chain is shortened and ends with the municipality. This is the only way in the future to limit the scale of problems such as the one with the Pernik Water Supply and Sewerage System and the Studena Dam and to avoid another theater of collective negligence, which we have seen in recent months.
