From the Council of Canadians;
Great Lakes Compact has bottled water loophole

As reported by WLUC today, "Although (the Great Lakes Basin) compact was sent to Congress asking to outlaw most diversions of water from the region, Representative Bart Stupak is concerned it doesn't go far enough. He says water bottlers have a loophole. Bottled water can be shipped from the area, which could affect the quantity and quality of our water. 'The Great Lakes - we consume about three to four percent of the water per year. We're only replenishing naturally one percent per year. You can see the loss. You can see the aquatic nuisances. We still don't have our hands around there,' said Stupak. The bill will also require states to regulate their own large-scale water use. It still has to be approved by Congress and then the White House to take affect."

A recent Associated Press report notes that, "Rep. Bart Stupak, a Michigan Democrat, says the ban on diversions has a significant loophole: It allows bottled water to be shipped from the region, a hotly debated issue in his state. He has not decided whether to oppose the compact, said spokesman Nick Choate. 'The commercialization of the water is the big issue for him,' Choate said."

An interview with James Olson, who many chapter activists will remember as the lawyer who fights Nestle in the documentary FLOW, discussing his concerns about the Great Lakes Compact, can be read at http://www.circleofblue.org/waternews/world/north-america/the-great-lakes-compact-and-the-potential-privatization-of-water-an-interview-with-james-m-olson/.
He highlights that, “One (concern) is that there is a huge product exemption; a precedent is being set that water can be privatized for export and sale. It is not subject to the diversion ban and Compact, which could tilt the gradient of Great Lakes water to the West, or to the Southeast, or anywhere in the world if it was in a container. It wasn’t intended to turn water into a private commodity, or to privatize water and there’s a huge risk that the Compact does exactly that.”

The AP article provides the background that, "A year ago, it seemed a proposed interstate compact designed to prevent thirstier regions from raiding the Great Lakes might be sunk by squabbles among the eight states with jurisdiction over the vast reservoir. Now the deal to govern nearly one-fifth of the world's fresh surface water is close to ratification at the state level, and supporters are beginning to plot strategy for the final step: winning approval from Congress and the White House...Leading supporters of the Great Lakes pact say they're aware of no significant opposition in Congress or from the Bush administration. Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama, the likely presidential nominees, both have endorsed it...Backers have been conducting briefings for congressional staffers from the Great Lakes states in hopes of gaining quick approval. However, no decision has been made yet on who will be the primary House and Senate sponsors, which committees will consider the compact and whether it will be structured as a bill, a resolution or an amendment to other legislation. Also unclear is when the pact would be introduced and whether it can get through Congress before the next president takes office."

In terms of Canadians legislative process, the AP story reports that, "After years of haggling, the governors signed the compact in December 2005. They couldn't make a binding agreement with Ontario and Quebec, but both provinces adopted laws nearly identical to the compact." To read the Council of Canadians media release on the signing of that agreement in December 2005, please go to http://www.canadians.org/media/water/2005/13-Dec-05.html. Other background materials on the Annex can be read at http://www.canadians.org/water/issues/Great_Lakes/index.html.

The Associated Press article can be read at, http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5glktog8_wjk-A8GJqqtQDKWX6OjQD91JSM380

The WLUC report is at, http://wluctv6.com/news/news_story.aspx?id=158660